The Obama Thread (Merged x6)

[Lightning Strykez!]

Why's there have to be a but? :csad: :heart:



Because my love for you is conditional as long as you make good political sense. The moment you stop making sense to me, I gotta kick yer ass outta the philosophical bed man. :(

[Mr Sparkle]

Obama is NO different from all of them - accept that he claims to be. At least you see just how transparent Obama's message is.

I just said that none of them are different, none of them are anything but politicians and they ALL claim to be things that they are not, hence the point you're trying to make seems odd.
what I'm saying is that in this particular case Obama is more likely to change perceptions of the US system, making small changes in the mindset of the American public.
one wonders what a good 4 year by Obama would yield in the societal field, perhaps nothing but the same old phrases, perhaps some lasting shift in predisposition.
one will only know if one tries.

[redfirebird2008]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBJl4lsoJZs

I'm afraid Mrs. Clinton has lost any respect I had for her. I'm not a latte-drinker, Prius-driver, or Birkenstock-wearer, and I don't have a trust fund. But I am in college, and I do know quite a few kids like that who support Hillary. This kind of political strategy is a thing of the past. Can't wait till Barack wins Texas and maybe the Clintons will finally give up and stop trying to divide the party.

[CorpusBlack]

I'm just sick of Clintons and Bushs. 16 years back and forth between those two camps is enough. I can't take another 4-8 years of it.

[Varient]

Thats the point. You pick the best of what you got. My dream would be a Schwarzenegger white house :o

((((Shudder)))

And that way opens the door to the end of America.

there are VERY GOOD REASONS why Schwarzenegger could never be president or Vice President and If it were made possible it would allow the world to start picking the US's Leaders.

No thanks.

[Kelly]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBJl4lsoJZs

I'm afraid Mrs. Clinton has lost any respect I had for her. I'm not a latte-drinker, Prius-driver, or Birkenstock-wearer, and I don't have a trust fund. But I am in college, and I do know quite a few kids like that who support Hillary. This kind of political strategy is a thing of the past. Can't wait till Barack wins Texas and maybe the Clintons will finally give up and stop trying to divide the party.

:csad: I'm a latte-drinker and I drive an Escape hybrid..........















does that make me a Hillary supporter???????:huh: :cwink: oh wait....nooooooooooooooooooooo.........I prefer Nike sandals.....

[BlackLantern]

:csad: I'm a latte-drinker and I drive an Escape hybrid..........does that make me a Hillary supporter???????:huh: :cwink:

No...it just makes you a big giant wussy pants tree hugger

[Kelly]

I just said that none of them are different, none of them are anything but politicians and they ALL claim to be things that they are not, hence the point you're trying to make seems odd.
what I'm saying is that in this particular case Obama is more likely to change perceptions of the US system, making small changes in the mindset of the American public.
one wonders what a good 4 year by Obama would yield in the societal field, perhaps nothing but the same old phrases, perhaps some lasting shift in predisposition.
one will only know if one tries.

Very true.....



Whoever is in as president......their next problem is working with the legislature........being president doesn't get you crap, if you can't get anything passed......

And I highly doubt Clinton or Obama is going to pull the troops out as fast as they say they are........not gonna happen....would love for it to happen sooner than later......but later is reality.

The US people hate the Legislative branch right now more than they hate he Executive branch......lmao. So who knows what the next Congressional campaigns are going to bring. That is going to be a total fiasco.....

[Kelly]

No...it just makes you a big giant wussy pants tree hugger




hey........hey.................................... ..hey.......I resemble that statement.....................................:cma d: :cmad:

[BlackLantern]

hey........hey.................................... ..hey.......I resemble that statement.....................................:cma d: :cmad:

Its all about balance...you can tree hug and I can drive an 11 miles to the gallon hummer while clubbing baby seals

[Kelly]

Its all about balance...you can tree hug and I can drive an 11 miles to the gallon hummer while clubbing baby seals


oh, you've gone too far bucko.......:o I'm coming to picket your house......




I'll send a menu ahead of time so you'll know what I like for dinner....:cwink: :woot:

[jaguarr]

:csad: I'm a latte-drinker and I drive an Escape hybrid..........















does that make me a Hillary supporter???????:huh: :cwink: oh wait....nooooooooooooooooooooo.........I prefer Nike sandals.....

Your support of ehhh.....loose child labor laws sets you apart from the crowd. :oldrazz:

jag

[BlackLantern]

oh, you've gone too far bucko.......:o I'm coming to picket your house......I'll send a menu ahead of time so you'll know what I like for dinner....:cwink: :woot:

You have a right to protest....and I'll see if I can dig up some milk fed veal for you:oldrazz:

[Venom'sDad]

Milk fed veal.... "shuddles"

[Venom'sDad]

Barack Obama has won another Primary... that's 11 in a row. He has won the Democrats Abroad Primary which is believe to carry 22 Delegates.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

[StorminNorman]

The shock waves of this decision will certainly boost him into Ohio and Texas ;)

[Venom'sDad]

The shock waves of this decision will certainly boost him into Ohio and Texas ;)

Anything that aids the "Stop billary Express", I'm for. :cool:

[sinewave]

Its not secure - but it is making strives to become secure. The job is far from over, but it is becoming far more manageable. The key is maintaining this momentum and having the Iraqi Government step up. American's alone can not secure the country.

do you really expect us to continue to pump money and troops into iraq if their government refuses to meet their end of the bargain? at some point enough has to be enough. i think the american public have reached that point. we've got enough to deal with stateside. nobody wants an expensive, unnecessary war bogging us down.

We only lose our dignity if we bail out before the mission is over. Do you really not think that if we leave Al Queda, they will not paint it as victory over the Great Satan?

You are right - Iraq was the wrong war at the wrong time. The fact is though that we have to deal with the hand our leaders have dealt us. We opened a hornets nest, but it serves us best in the long term to take care of it now instead of running away in fear.

I think many American's have bought in to the idea that there is no way we can win this war. While, yes, other factors like the economy have hurt the morale of the country as a whole - I think if American's believed there was the chance of taking care of the job and leaving - there would be far more support at home.

I HOPE you are right. I want to believe that we can leave Iraq and have nothing of real consequence happen. I really do, since I don't think President McCain will be able to unite the country on the war much better than President Bush.

i think we lost our dignity the second bush declared "mission accomplished".

The GOP doesn't rail about McCain not being Conservative. Far Right Talk Show hosts do. Its the far right that has not accepted McCain - not Republicans in general. If that was the case, he would of never won the GOP nomination, no matter how many independents he got.

then why hasn't bush even mentioned him by name when discussing the race? why won't he endorse him? why won't the party tell huckabee to stop campaigning to mccain can focus on the general election? why did mccain get booed at CPAC? why did romney get booed by them when he dropped out and made mccain the undisputed frontrunner? is CPAC an extreme part of the part? because i though the term "conservative" was a pretty good description of your typical republican voter?

I don't think the far-left is horrible. I simply disagree with them on most issues.

good, because they get a bad rap for essentially standing up for good things, compared to the heightened level or fanaticism and extremism on the far-right, that wishes to further divide the country by injecting religion into it in attempts to limit the rights and level of wellbeing of certain groups of people.

And while the GOP has done a poor job in keeping the extremist from making strong footholds in the party - the Democrats have made the extremists the mainstream. Howard Dean is the head of the DNC. Nanci Pelosi is Speaker of the House. Harry Reid is Senate Majority Leader. Those are among the most liberal members, the most extreme members of the party.

Moderates like Lieberman have been shunned by the mainstream of the DNC.

Thats what makes me upset at the Democrats.

I was absolutely fed up with Republicans. I was BEGGING for a moderate from the Democrats that I could support. It never came.

how would you compare the far-left to the far-right? what are the turn-offs with the far-left?

dean's a great fundraiser, so his level of liberal extremism doesn't really have much to do with that position.

lieberman was shunned because he sided with the president on the most important issue of the time. he wasn't representing his democratic constituents, hence he lost their support. there are plenty of moderate dems who haven't been "shunned". mark pryor of arkansas, for instance.

what are you using as criteria for you claims that pelosi and reid are "the most liberal, extreme members of the party"? are you aware of how extreme tom delay and bill frist were during their time as senate majority leaders? why is one extreme more acceptable than the other when we've see what the acceptable one has done (bad), but haven't really seen many negative affects from the other end. raising the minimum wage must be considered a dirty, extreme thing, i guess... ooh, those hate far-left extremists! how dare they want better healthcare for everyone and better education and less money spent on war! those savages!

[StorminNorman]

do you really expect us to continue to pump money and troops into iraq if their government refuses to meet their end of the bargain? at some point enough has to be enough. i think the american public have reached that point. we've got enough to deal with stateside. nobody wants an expensive, unnecessary war bogging us down.

I agree that there has to be a point where it becomes where it becomes obvious the Iraqi Government is a failure. I do not think that time is now. I do not think you can necessarily put a time line on that. I think given the increase in stability there has to start being a push in that direction from the government does - and if there is not, then I would be forced to start looking for a withdrawal.

i think we lost our dignity the second bush declared "mission accomplished".

I don't. It didn't hurt our image with anyone who already disagreed with us for going in - but it didn't help with anyone who already had our backs.

then why hasn't bush even mentioned him by name when discussing the race? why won't he endorse him? why won't the party tell huckabee to stop campaigning to mccain can focus on the general election? why did mccain get booed at CPAC? why did romney get booed by them when he dropped out and made mccain the undisputed frontrunner? is CPAC an extreme part of the part? because i though the term "conservative" was a pretty good description of your typical republican voter?

Bush has endorsed McCain - or has endorsed him as much as the McCain campaign would allow him. He is not going to tell Huckabee to stop campaigning because there is no real need for him to - all the other Republican leaders are echoing (more or less) those sentiments and it can allow McCain some separation from Bush - which is what he SHOULD want.

McCain got booed at CPAC on the topic of illegal immigration because the McCain-Kennedy bill went completely against (more or less) the entire Republican party. (One reason I don't fully understand these "McCain became a GOP puppet" complaints) He was generally well received overall.

good, because they get a bad rap for essentially standing up for good things, compared to the heightened level or fanaticism and extremism on the far-right, that wishes to further divide the country by injecting religion into it in attempts to limit the rights and level of wellbeing of certain groups of people.

I disagree about dismissing the far-right and promoting the far-left as crusaders for good. I believe that (by in large) both are doing what they feel are best for the country. They are both as just as manipulative as well.

how would you compare the far-left to the far-right? what are the turn-offs with the far-left?

I agree with the Far Left far more socially - I support gay marriage and adpotion, right to abortion, legalizing weed and hemp.

I disagree with the steps they want to take to increase the role of government in our lives (a similar concern I have with the far right - though the issues are different) I hate the idea of European-Style Health Care, for example. I don't believe the United States should sacrifice sovereignty to an International Body - such as a Global Tax and National Security issues. I am on the fence about how I feel about Government taking care of Environmental issues - I feel that the private sector is almost always far more effective. I also don't understand the far-lefts problem with School Vouchers.

I also don't like the growing anti-military sentiment among many in the far far left though I am ready to admit it is not amongst the majority. I also am not sure if the far left is, in general, willing to do enough to combat Islamic Extremist simply because I don't think they take the threat nearly as serious as I do. An example is no objection to open boarders.

dean's a great fundraiser, so his level of liberal extremism doesn't really have much to do with that position.

He is a great fund raiser - but he is also a figure head for the party. He represents the party, so his positions DO matter.

lieberman was shunned because he sided with the president on the most important issue of the time. he wasn't representing his democratic constituents, hence he lost their support. there are plenty of moderate dems who haven't been "shunned". mark pryor of arkansas, for instance.

Lieberman had been a great Senator for his people for so long, and a great member of his party. The Democratic Party should of given him more support - in spite of disagreeing about one (no matter how vital) issue. If he had received more support from the party - I think the voters would of sided with him in the primary.

what are you using as criteria for you claims that pelosi and reid are "the most liberal, extreme members of the party"? are you aware of how extreme tom delay and bill frist were during their time as senate majority leaders? why is one extreme more acceptable than the other when we've see what the acceptable one has done (bad), but haven't really seen many negative affects from the other end. raising the minimum wage must be considered a dirty, extreme thing, i guess... ooh, those hate far-left extremists! how dare they want better healthcare for everyone and better education and less money spent on war! those savages!

My comment applies more about Pelosi than Reid, to be fair. Pelosi was ranked by the National Journal to be more liberal than 92% of the House. Reid is more moderate, though his rhetoric at times can hide that. He has made comments about the Iraq war, for example, that is simply not correct.

I did object to raising the minimum wage. And while they do WANT better Health Care and Education - they haven't proposed any plans that would deliver it, IMO. All of their solutions involve increasing government size.

On the topic of Right Wingers, you are correct, Tom Delay was very extreme (Frist, not so much), I did not support him (Delay). I don't find one extreme more acceptable than the other. I want more moderates in power - from both sides.

The difference is, however, I think the Republican Party in general is more accepting of moderates than the Democrat Party. There is no moderate leader in the Democrat party where the Republicans can point to, if nothing else, their candidate for President.

[sinewave]

i just read through my previous post again. sorry for all the typos.

I agree that there has to be a point where it becomes where it becomes obvious the Iraqi Government is a failure. I do not think that time is now. I do not think you can necessarily put a time line on that. I think given the increase in stability there has to start being a push in that direction from the government does - and if there is not, then I would be forced to start looking for a withdrawal.

i guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, because i think we don need some kind of timeline to motivate the iraqi government to start getting things done. our occupation should not be open-ended.

I don't. It didn't hurt our image with anyone who already disagreed with us for going in - but it didn't help with anyone who already had our backs.

it sure did make us look foolish, well, him anyway.

Bush has endorsed McCain - or has endorsed him as much as the McCain campaign would allow him. He is not going to tell Huckabee to stop campaigning because there is no real need for him to - all the other Republican leaders are echoing (more or less) those sentiments and it can allow McCain some separation from Bush - which is what he SHOULD want.

McCain got booed at CPAC on the topic of illegal immigration because the McCain-Kennedy bill went completely against (more or less) the entire Republican party. (One reason I don't fully understand these "McCain became a GOP puppet" complaints) He was generally well received overall.

what about booing romney for dropping out of the race? you want to tell me that wasn't because of what that left them with for candidates? huckabee is still pulling in a good share of delegates for being a far-right conservative. i know that's mostly from evangelical voters, but it still speaks volumes of how dissatisfied a lot of republicans are with mccain as their party's nominee.

I disagree about dismissing the far-right and promoting the far-left as crusaders for good. I believe that (by in large) both are doing what they feel are best for the country. They are both as just as manipulative as well.

i'd say the far-right goes much further with their extremism. they're more vocal and, frankly, better at promoting their agenda than the far-left. nobody on the left even compares to the size and level of persuasion that the far-right christian conservatives hold within their party. does moveone.org have weekly calls with democratic leaders like far-right groups like "focus on the family" have with bush? you'll never convince me that they're both equal.

I agree with the Far Left far more socially - I support gay marriage and adpotion, right to abortion, legalizing weed and hemp.

cool. :up:

I disagree with the steps they want to take to increase the role of government in our lives (a similar concern I have with the far right - though the issues are different) I hate the idea of European-Style Health Care, for example. I don't believe the United States should sacrifice sovereignty to an International Body - such as a Global Tax and National Security issues. I am on the fence about how I feel about Government taking care of Environmental issues - I feel that the private sector is almost always far more effective. I also don't understand the far-lefts problem with School Vouchers.

I also don't like the growing anti-military sentiment among many in the far far left though I am ready to admit it is not amongst the majority. I also am not sure if the far left is, in general, willing to do enough to combat Islamic Extremist simply because I don't think they take the threat nearly as serious as I do. An example is no objection to open boarders.

what's wrong with "european-style health care"? it seems to be working pretty well for them. i'm gonna get knocked for bringing this up, but watch "sicko". it does a pretty good job dispelling a lot of the rumors and falsehoods about universal health care. why are people so concerned with money? health care should be made more affordable and available to everyone. we're the only civilized western country without some sort of system that provides free health care to everyone. that's not right, especially since we're the richest country in the world. it just sounds like the "haves" want to keep raking in the dough instead of helping the "have-nots". i'm sick of people trying to demonize those of us who want universal health care. it's cold, inhumane bull**** and it all revolves around money. that's just petty.

i agree with you about the anti-military sentiment, but that's an extremely small portion of the left.

He is a great fund raiser - but he is also a figure head for the party. He represents the party, so his positions DO matter.

when's the last time he actually had a mic in front of him? the party has been pretty good at keeping him away from the media. he's a fundraiser, that's it. he's not a spokesperson for the entire party.

Lieberman had been a great Senator for his people for so long, and a great member of his party. The Democratic Party should of given him more support - in spite of disagreeing about one (no matter how vital) issue. If he had received more support from the party - I think the voters would of sided with him in the primary.

i think the party was right to pull their support for him. he basically became a rubber stamp for bush on the war. he was bush's go-to guy whenever he needed to claim he received bi-partisan support on the war. it was really disgusting how much lieberman kowtowed to him. dems didn't like that and their voters voted him out. that's how it worked. you don't see the same
anger towards moderates like ben nelson. it had to do with lieberman's extremely vocal support for an obviously failed policy. it's that simple.

My comment applies more about Pelosi than Reid, to be fair. Pelosi was ranked by the National Journal to be more liberal than 92% of the House. Reid is more moderate, though his rhetoric at times can hide that. He has made comments about the Iraq war, for example, that is simply not correct.

and what exactly has become of the queen liberal's voting record? what damage has it done to this country? can you compare it to the far-right's abuse of democracy in vote tampering? or their efforts to interfere with the personal lives of american citizens? limit people's rights? no, it's all bull**** from the republican smear machine.

I did object to raising the minimum wage. And while they do WANT better Health Care and Education - they haven't proposed any plans that would deliver it, IMO. All of their solutions involve increasing government size.

On the topic of Right Wingers, you are correct, Tom Delay was very extreme (Frist, not so much), I did not support him (Delay). I don't find one extreme more acceptable than the other. I want more moderates in power - from both sides.

The difference is, however, I think the Republican Party in general is more accepting of moderates than the Democrat Party. There is no moderate leader in the Democrat party where the Republicans can point to, if nothing else, their candidate for President.

look, there are just certain services that we can't trust the private sector to manage. we're not going to privatize the fire department because they'd take the cheap way out on safety as a business decision that would end up costing lives. it's the same with health care. corporations just want to drive up the price to make a buck. this is something that will benefit us. conservatives need to stop thinking with their wallets so much. we can afford universal health care and it's long overdue.


these chats are exhausting. i'm done for the day. i'm sure i'll piss off a lot of conservatives with my comments and i bet a lot of the stuff i said isn't fully accurate, but i don't have time to fact check everything when trying to respond to huge posts during the work day. thanks for chatting.

[StorminNorman]

i just read through my previous post again. sorry for all the typos.

I am sure I will make the same mistake - so no worried :up:

With a debate as entertaining as this, I certainly am not going to resort to complain about any really trivial matters.

i guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this one, because i think we don need some kind of timeline to motivate the iraqi government to start getting things done. our occupation should not be open-ended.

I certainly understand WHERE you are coming from. I just hope that you aren't right. I hope the Iraqi Government can take the iniative to stablize itself. There does HAVE to be a cut off eventually though, you are right. It can't be open-ended.

it sure did make us look foolish, well, him anyway.

Yes, more Bush than America I think though.

what about booing romney for dropping out of the race? you want to tell me that wasn't because of what that left them with for candidates? huckabee is still pulling in a good share of delegates for being a far-right conservative. i know that's mostly from evangelical voters, but it still speaks volumes of how dissatisfied a lot of republicans are with mccain as their party's nominee.

Conservatives prefered Romney to McCain. That is not arguable. I simply don't think there are THAT many Conservatives that will allow Obama or Hillary come to office instead of supporting McCain.

[quite]i'd say the far-right goes much further with their extremism. they're more vocal and, frankly, better at promoting their agenda than the far-left. nobody on the left even compares to the size and level of persuasion that the far-right christian conservatives hold within their party. does moveone.org have weekly calls with democratic leaders like far-right groups like "focus on the family" have with bush? you'll never convince me that they're both equal. [/quote]

The far-left, to a certain extent control the media given them great persuasion with America. Again - I think this is a reason why the progress made in Iraq is not well known.

I disagree that the far right is more vocal. For ever Coulter and Limbaugh you have Michael Moore, Keith Olberman and various other far left media figures.

I would agree that the far right christian conservative base has more influence than I would like - but this election showed they didn't control the GOP. Huckabee was always the third place candidate.

cool. :up:

I am moving closer and closer to that center :up:

what's wrong with "european-style health care"? it seems to be working pretty well for them. i'm gonna get knocked for bringing this up, but watch "sicko". it does a pretty good job dispelling a lot of the rumors and falsehoods about universal health care. why are people so concerned with money? health care should be made more affordable and available to everyone. we're the only civilized western country without some sort of system that provides free health care to everyone. that's not right, especially since we're the richest country in the world. it just sounds like the "haves" want to keep raking in the dough instead of helping the "have-nots". i'm sick of people trying to demonize those of us who want universal health care. it's cold, inhumane bull**** and it all revolves around money. that's just petty.

Canadians come to America for healthcare because they can't receive immediate care in their own country with Universal Health Care.

I have no problem with a Government sponsored affordable Health Care plan - but to make it required for all is not proper, IMO. It should not be "one size fits all". I think it is better for us to have competition. That drive to make a profit from companies does serve to help American's. It forces them to keep their standards high.

I do think there should be a plan to deal with those that can't even afford the government health care - but to group ALL of the country into a Universal Health Care plan is not what I want.

i agree with you about the anti-military sentiment, but that's an extremely small portion of the left.

I was trying to make it clear that while I criticize that section of the left wing - I do recognize it does not reflect a large number in the party. I hope that came across.

when's the last time he actually had a mic in front of him? the party has been pretty good at keeping him away from the media. he's a fundraiser, that's it. he's not a spokesperson for the entire party.
Last Tuesday I think with the Primary ;)

I understand the he is not the "spokesman" for the DNC - but he is a figure and a representative of the Party as a whole. It comes with the position.

i think the party was right to pull their support for him. he basically became a rubber stamp for bush on the war. he was bush's go-to guy whenever he needed to claim he received bi-partisan support on the war. it was really disgusting how much lieberman kowtowed to him. dems didn't like that and their voters voted him out. that's how it worked. you don't see the same anger towards moderates like ben nelson. it had to do with lieberman's extremely vocal support for an obviously failed policy. it's that simple.

You do make a good case, I can't argue that.

and what exactly has become of the queen liberal's voting record? what damage has it done to this country? can you compare it to the far-right's abuse of democracy in vote tampering? or their efforts to interfere with the personal lives of american citizens? limit people's rights? no, it's all bull**** from the republican smear machine.

To be fair, the political situation has never allowed us to see the damage (or benefits) of a very left wing agenda passing through Washington.

I am also not aware of vote tampering and I do know that several of the Republican efforts to interfere with American personal lives are supported by the majority of the country (assuming you are talking about gay marriage and the like).

I do, however, share your same complaints of that same governemnt intervention and I greatly dislike the continued withering away of rights in America.

look, there are just certain services that we can't trust the private sector to manage. we're not going to privatize the fire department because they'd take the cheap way out on safety as a business decision that would end up costing lives. it's the same with health care. corporations just want to drive up the price to make a buck. this is something that will benefit us. conservatives need to stop thinking with their wallets so much. we can afford universal health care and it's long overdue.

There are some services that would be impratical to privatize. I don't think Health Care (or Education) is one of them. I don't want a government controlled health care system.

these chats are exhausting. i'm done for the day. i'm sure i'll piss off a lot of conservatives with my comments and i bet a lot of the stuff i said isn't fully accurate, but i don't have time to fact check everything when trying to respond to huge posts during the work day. thanks for chatting.

Sadly my initial response to you was about twice as long and probably far better written. I am writing this with great frustration because I lost that entire effort. I do hope you will continue though (even if I have to wait) because I quite enjoy this. :up:

[terry78]

Debate in two hours, ain't it?

[Kelly]

Debate in two hours, ain't it?


Yes.......I almost took the day off and took off for Austin..............and then the weather turned crapola again.....so kinda squashed that idea.:o

[MetalloX]

8M6x1H08aFc
Nope, You're an idiot and a huckafan.

[Venom'sDad]

LOFL, instead of *****ing and whining about doing a debate in WI, I think billary should have been asking not to do anymore, because she is getting her arse handed to her on a platter.

[Kelly]

Who the hell cares about that damn speech.......good lord Hillary..........you actually had a chance to pull yourself up in this debate........she should have never even uttered a word about that stupid speech.



It is sad when someone could win a debate with you, without uttering a word...........


Takes note.....

[redfirebird2008]

Hillary got booed tonight for attacking Barack as a plagiarizer. And he absolutely owned her on the "get real" and plagiarism charges.

[Kelly]

I have a feeling.........that she just killed her campaign......literally.



And he knew it, he didn't have to say a thing back at her.......he let the Boooing Texans do it for him.......and Texans booing is never a good thing.

[redfirebird2008]

I have a feeling.........that she just killed her campaign......literally.



And he knew it, he didn't have to say a thing back at her.......he let the Boooing Texans do it for him.......and Texans booing is never a good thing.

Yeah. She got a huge roar at the beginning of the day so she has plenty of support there. She walked into the boo-fest by being petty and nasty with the Xerox comment. Plus, he finally attacked the media (and Clinton's campaign) for making claims that his supporters are a cult and somehow delusional. It's a pretty big insult to make those kind of claims and I take a big offense to it. I have my own mind and I don't agree with Barack on plenty of things, but I do agree with him on some very important issues.

[rdh007]

He's not a Huckafan. And while I believe (and he probably would return the favor) he's mostly wrong on politics, he's not an idiot.

[Venom'sDad]

Well I guess I can get off the "Stop billary Express" because she just bought me a flight to Hope.... and it's not a town in Arkansas. :hehe:

[Zen]

You guys are seeing a clear winner here?

aside from some pettiness which isnt helping hillary... i think this is another boring debate that isn't digging into the policies enough...

Ughhhh

[redfirebird2008]

You guys are seeing a clear winner here?

aside from some pettiness which isnt helping hillary... i think this is another boring debate that isn't digging into the policies enough...

Ughhhh

No, not a clear winner but finally Barack stood up to some of her attacks as well as some of the attacks from the media on his supporters. They both have very good ideas and for the most part it's a stalemate from what I can tell. They're very similar on the issues.

[Kelly]

Actually they finally dug into the healthcare issue more......that was the most specific I've heard from Obama's lips.....so that was nice to see and here.

[Zen]

Actually they finally dug into the healthcare issue more......that was the most specific I've heard from Obama's lips.....so that was nice to see and here.


i wish they let them keep going on that

[redfirebird2008]

i wish they let them keep going on that

Neither one of them will admit they're wrong, though I think Hillary has definitely been misleading people. Some of her advertising claims he's intentionally trying to leave out people, but she never mentions the fact that the mandates in her plan are for regular people. It's not a free service by the government and I think she glosses over that quite a bit.

[Kelly]

i wish they let them keep going on that


Me too, that was getting into some meat..............

[Venom'sDad]

:lmao: OMG!!! billary is begging and pleading for Obama's VP opening. LMAO!

[Arkady Rossovich]

Everyone is trying to stop Obama. But that looks like it isn't happening.

[redfirebird2008]

Hey, Hillary is being nice to him now! It's about time. Good job Hillary. :)

[The Senator]

Line of the night:

Change You Can Xerox :up:

[rdh007]

Line of the night:

Change You Can Xerox :up:

Not bad. Not bad. She'd make a great former first lady with speeches like that.

[Zen]

Line of the night:

Change You Can Xerox :up:


she was Boo'ed for it.

i wonder if she would take that back with a delorean

[redfirebird2008]

Line of the night:

Change You Can Xerox :up:

Booed like nobody's business. The line of the night was when she said it was honor to be with him. THAT gained her some points with people I think.

[The Senator]

So she was booed. It doesn't mean she didn't make a good point.

She also shouldn't have to kiss Obama's ass to get praise. This isn't an asskissing contest; it's a debate.

[Venom'sDad]

The line of the night was when she said it was honor to be with him.

That line was her pandering for the VP job. :whatever: It was written all on her expression. She knows it's over.

[redfirebird2008]

That line was her pandering for the VP job. :whatever: It was written all on her expression. She knows it's over.

I disagree. I thought it was genuine, and it's something that has been missing from her message lately.

[The Senator]

That line was her pandering for the VP job. :whatever: It was written all on her expression. She knows it's over.

She's not pandering for the VP position. She wants the Presidency or nothing at all, and wouldn't give Obama the chance to balance his ticket with her experience. It can also be attributed to this point, which I think would be the main reason why she wouldn't run as his VP: She doesn't want to be overshadowed. This was supposed to be her time, and if she is his VP, or if he is her VP, she won't be the "star" anymore.

Any idea that she's kissing his ass to take a stab at the VP slot proves that you know nothing about Hillary Clinton except what your own bias tells you is true.

[Zen]

i think Hillary scored big right at the end, talking about how shes had a difficult time... but its nothing compared to the american people... and then showing of friendlyness at the end just resonated better...

the people did not rise when petty attacks tried to get into the debate... they rose up when they looked like they were both hopefull no matter who got elected,

people want to see unity instead of attack... thats why they roared when they shook hands when hillary said she was honored.

[Zen]

She's not pandering for the VP position. She wants the Presidency or nothing at all, and wouldn't give Obama the chance to balance his ticket with her experience. It can also be attributed to this point, which I think would be the main reason why she wouldn't run as his VP: She doesn't want to be overshadowed. This was supposed to be her time, and if she is his VP, or if he is her VP, she won't be the "star" anymore.

Any idea that she's kissing his ass to take a stab at the VP slot proves that you know nothing about Hillary Clinton except what your own bias tells you is true.

i also find it hard to imagine them teaming up in any form.

[rdh007]

That was a pretty good line, but it didn't change my mind that she is a) not going to win the White House for Democrats and that b) everything she does is carefully orchestrated.

[CorpusBlack]

i also find it hard to imagine them teaming up in any form.

Never EVER going to happen. And thank **** for that. :up:

That was a pretty good line, but it didn't change my mind that she is a) not going to win the White House for Democrats and that b) everything she does is carefully orchestrated.

She's done man. Done, defeated and laid to rest. Not that I even care who is left across the board, but I will take anyone over her.

[Venom'sDad]

i think Hillary scored big right at the end, talking about how shes had a difficult time... but its nothing compared to the american people... and then showing of friendlyness at the end just resonated better...

the people did not rise when petty attacks tried to get into the debate... they rose up when they looked like they were both hopefull no matter who got elected,

people want to see unity instead of attack... thats why they roared when they shook hands when hillary said she was honored.

WOW! You think she scored big the whole debate, the whole night, when she pandered to Barack Obama. WOW! I totally disagree, I didn't see one moment where she even came close to doing or saying anything that would get her back into this race. As a matter of fact, I saw a number of moments where she completely sunk her own campaign.

But I find it fasinating that you and many other thought her best moment was at the end she said she is honored(pander) to be next to him. If she was so honored, she would have congradulated him all three times she had the opportunity to, after each Primary he won. She's not honored, she kissing arse... she know after her performance(or lack there of), it's over. He won the debate on substance. She should drop out of the debate next Tuesday, than drop out of the race at the very least, after March 4th.

[BlackLantern]

watching Hilary tonight made me think of the sound of a dying giraffe....

[CorpusBlack]

watching Hilary tonight made me think of the sound of a dying giraffe....

:grin: A dying giraffe never sounded so damn good.

[The Senator]

WOW! You think she scored big the whole debate, the whole night, when she pandered to Barack Obama. WOW! I totally disagree, I didn't see one moment where she even came close to doing or saying anything that would get her back into this race. As a matter of fact, I saw a number of moments where she completely sunk her own campaign.

But I find it fasinating that you and many other thought her best moment was at the end she said she is honored(pander) to be next to him. If she was so honored, she would have congradulated him all three times she had the opportunity to, after each Primary he won. She's not honored, she kissing arse... she know after her performance(or lack there of), it's over. He won the debate on substance. She should drop out of the debate next Tuesday, than drop out of the race at the very least, after March 4th.

Um, she has no reason to drop out of the race, because there is still a chance that she can win Texas and Ohio. Just because she had a poor debate performance, that doesn't mean she should drop out. :whatever:

[redfirebird2008]

Um, she has no reason to drop out of the race, because there is still a chance that she can win Texas and Ohio. Just because she had a poor debate performance, that doesn't mean she should drop. :whatever:

Poor debate performance? She wasn't bad at all. She was actually pretty good except for some petty shots here and there. And I really think she redeemed herself at the end with her respectful comments.

[The Senator]

Poor debate performance? She wasn't bad at all. She was actually pretty good except for some petty shots here and there. And I really think she redeemed herself at the end with her respectful comments.

Well, that's not what our friend VD is indicating. I didn't get a chance to watch the debate, so I had to rely on up-to-the-minute feeds from CNN, but I was under the impression that she did pretty well despite a few screw ups (obviously, the Xerox comment, despite the fact that it was brilliant).

But I guess when your opinions are controlled by bias and bias alone, you can't look at things objectively.

[CorpusBlack]

And I really think she redeemed herself at the end with her respectful comments.

A ploy for voter sympathy.

[Cory]

the xerox comment hurt hillary...the ending hurt obama...

looks like hillary thinks shes already lost though.

[redfirebird2008]

Well, that's not what our friend VD is indicating. I didn't get a chance to watch the debate, so I had to rely on up-to-the-minute feeds from CNN, but I was under the impression that she did pretty well despite a few screw ups (obviously, the Xerox comment, despite the fact that it was brilliant).

But I guess when your opinions are controlled by bias and bias alone, you can't look at things objectively.

She did very well. She is a great debater. Early in the campaign she was owning Barack big time in the debates. But sometime around the South Carolina debate he really started getting much more comfortable in this format. Hillary is at her best when she attacks the Republicans and talks positively about her own plans to fix Bush's mess rather than trying to attack Barack. Because lately he has been hitting back and making her look like a fool in some cases. I think the debate tonight was mostly a draw just like the L.A. debate. They are very similar candidates. Lots of "I mostly agree with you, but..." whereas the Republicans had all out war going on during their debates! :hehe:

[BlackLantern]

would anyone say Hilary is a master debater??

[redfirebird2008]

would anyone say Hilary is a master debater??

Yes, I would. She's definitely very good, though she has had a few gaffes in this campaign during the debates. But overall she is a master debater. Some of the gaffes are a result of her campaign managers coming up with nasty things for her to say. Even as she said the Xerox comment, you could tell she kind of regretted it immediately, even before the boos started. Mark Penn is an ******* of a strategist, kind of like Karl Rove but not anywhere near as bad. I think he more than anything is why her campaign got off-track to begin with.

[Masamune]

Edit

[Masamune]

^don't you get the joke?:hehe:

[redfirebird2008]

^don't you get the joke?:hehe:

Oh. LOL, just caught on. :woot::hehe:

[BlackLantern]

Oh. LOL, just caught on. :woot::hehe:

you almost failed

[redfirebird2008]

you almost failed

I'm not a 19 percenter. :woot:

[bunk]

the xerox comment hurt hillary...the ending hurt obama...

looks like hillary thinks shes already lost though.

Yeah, just because you come up with a zinger before the debate doesn't mean you actually have to use it. Her ending comments will be less impressive once everyone catches on to the fact she stole it from Edwards.

[Masamune]

Its all good.

[redfirebird2008]

Yeah, just because you come up with a zinger before the debate doesn't mean you actually have to use it. Her ending comments will be less impressive once everyone catches on to the fact she stole it from Edwards.

Obama's people have already put it out there that she did, and they made a point that it was shortly after those comments that Edwards dropped out of the race. CNN read both quotes and said that they're not exactly the same, but definitely similar.

[bunk]

It seemed like Hillary was really trying to channel Edwards in that debate.

[The Senator]

Her ending comments will be less impressive once everyone catches on to the fact she stole it from Edwards.

Who?? :huh: :huh:


:cwink:

[Excel]

Obama rocked the house!

[souvlaki]

Yeah, just because you come up with a zinger before the debate doesn't mean you actually have to use it. Her ending comments will be less impressive once everyone catches on to the fact she stole it from Edwards.

Actually, Bill Clinton too.

Bill Clinton, 1992: "The hits that I took in this election are nothing compared to the hits the people of this state and this country have been taking for a long time."

Hillary Clinton, tonight: "You know, the hits I’ve taken in life are nothing compared to what goes on every single day in the lives of people across our country."

[The Senator]

Actually, Bill Clinton too.

Bill Clinton, 1992: "The hits that I took in this election are nothing compared to the hits the people of this state and this country have been taking for a long time."

Hillary Clinton, tonight: "You know, the hits I’ve taken in life are nothing compared to what goes on every single day in the lives of people across our country."

Well, she is his wife...

[Excel]

And she did just say words that arnet yours mean nothing 20 minutes earlier...

[bunk]

That's what's so funny about it.

[The Senator]

And she did just say words that arnet yours mean nothing 20 minutes earlier...

But she wasn't dumb enough to copy an entire speech that her husband gave, verbatim, in an effort to refute her opponent's criticism.

[Lightning Strykez!]

But she wasn't dumb enough to copy an entire speech that her husband gave, verbatim, in an effort to refute her opponent's criticism.

You're playing semantics. She did the same thing he did--the concept is one and the same. :whatever: Mark my words, the similarities will be drawn by the media in the days to come.

She fumbled with this debate I think, but she had some great moments too. But I doubt she made a dent in his momentum. :dry: Overall, I think she damaged her campaign because basically he neutralized her at several points. Her attempts to go petty REALLY hurt her though, but at at this point I don't even 100% blame her: I blame that ****wad Mark Penn. He should've been fired back in South Carolina. That "Xerox" comment was the epitome of lame.

[Venom'sDad]

She fumbled with this debate I think, but she had some great moments too. But I doubt she made a dent in his momentum. :dry: Overall, I think she damaged her campaign, at at this point I don't even 100% blame her: I blame that ****wad Mark Penn. He should've been fired back in South Carolina.

I'm sorry, but I have never been able to understand or ascertain why people and these network pundits, place blame on an essentially, a "campaign advisor". It appears never the candidate. She makes the final decision how she will conduct her campaign. She's running for office, this is her election. They advise, make suggestion, prepare situations that are more conducive to their candidate; but at the end of the day, it is her responsibility to present herself in the fashion she want to be percieve as by the American people.

Look, God forbid, she became Prez and something happen on "Day 1" and she seek input & advice from her advisors; those action she take fail horribly, are we as the American People going to say, that damn such & such f*** that situation up? Mark Penn is not the problem; he may be one of many; but he is not "THE" problem. The candidate ultimately is the reason why a campaign succeed; it's the reason why a campaign fails. She is the problem her campaign has failed.

[redfirebird2008]

Well, she is his wife...

Well, he is the Obama campaign's national co-chairman and that didn't stop the attacks on Barack.

[Lightning Strykez!]

I'm sorry, but I have never been able to understand or ascertain why people and thse network pundits, place blame on an essentially, a "campaign advisor". It appears never the candidate. She makes the final decision how she will conduct her campaign. She's running for office, this is her election. They advise, make suggestion, prepare situations that are more conducive to their candidate; but at the end of the day, it is her responsibility to present herself in the fashion she want to be percieve as by the American people.

Look, God forbid, she became Prez and something happen on "Day 1" and she seek input & advice from her advisors; those action she take fail horribly, are we as the American People going to say, that damn such & such f*** that situation up? Mark Penn is not the problem; he may be one of many; but he is not "THE" problem. The candidate ultimately is the reason why a campaign succeed; it's the reason why a campaign fails. She is the problem her campaign has failed.

Point well taken. Ultimately she is responsible, if not for simply hiring the man. However, I do blame him as well because his job is to provide her with the best support possible. Behind every good woman, is a good man. LOL :p

Mark is a bad, bad man. :D

[Venom'sDad]

Point well taken. Ultimately she is responsible, if not for simply hiring the man. However, I do blame him as well because his job is to provide her with the best support possible. Behind every good woman, is a good man. LOL :p

Mark is a bad, bad man. :D

;):up::cool:

[Zen]

WOW! You think she scored big the whole debate, the whole night, when she pandered to Barack Obama. WOW! I totally disagree, I didn't see one moment where she even came close to doing or saying anything that would get her back into this race. As a matter of fact, I saw a number of moments where she completely sunk her own campaign.

But I find it fasinating that you and many other thought her best moment was at the end she said she is honored(pander) to be next to him. If she was so honored, she would have congradulated him all three times she had the opportunity to, after each Primary he won. She's not honored, she kissing arse... she know after her performance(or lack there of), it's over. He won the debate on substance. She should drop out of the debate next Tuesday, than drop out of the race at the very least, after March 4th.

Hmmm...

i dont think she scored big the whole debate. :huh:

i was only metioning that the best moment for her was when she acted in solidarity as Barack has been doing the whole damn campaign. and i never mentioned i thought this debate did anything positive in the end for Hilarry because lets be honest... she needed a knock out punch to even hope to catch up to Obama in pledged delegates,

look she was screaming for these debates and i saw nothing that helped her at all. Obama's only job was to not make a mistake... not only did he do that but he defended himself very cleverly and sounded alot like a commander in chief when he was talking about judgement on the war in Iraq. and ive been saying that this is the sleeper hit of his campaign all along.

if this is what Hillary was begging a debate for then she needs to fire her campaign manager. she needed to get a large upper hand. ...didn't happen.

as for me... i am an Obama supporter, have been for a while on these boards. but i will not however swoon and flush when he talks, and totally admonish her oponent simply out of sheer excitement that my candidate is doing well. all i am observing is that Hillary had to play the same game Obama has from the beggining... and thats inspiring the people and acting in solidarity towards each other, instead she has gone negative and that destroyed her...

and thats why i think her last couple of lines and her disposition worked so well for her in the end, because thats how she should have been acting all along.

[Zen]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/02/22/wuspols222.xml

really? :huh:

Clinton is loosing this simply because her campaign staff is worthless

[BlackLantern]

Not to sound xenophobic but who gives a **** what some Brit newspaper has to say about OUR election??

[Kelly]

I think the whole debate over using parts of someone elses speech is stupid.....hell how many have used parts of FDR's speeches, or Kennedy's speeches or Reagan's speeches.............its just stupid, and childish. The fact that Obama's people brought up the same thing 2 minutes after she said it on blogs, make them just as childish as her.......and I hope he slaps them for it......Obama didn't say......"ok............now THESE ARE MY WORDS...." and then said them, nor did Clinton. You hear something that impresses you, you feel passionate about, you use it in conversation.....the whole thing is childish and stupid, and puts a HUGE black mark on this campaign for me. We finally get into some meat with this debate, and first the damn commentator tries to cut them off, and then the entire conversation about the debate is over who said what, when, first, and how many times. Just ignorant.

[BlackLantern]

I think when Hilary started on about that Barack should have thrown that glass of water in her face and started a fistfight....."Here's an original a$$ whuppin..."

[The Senator]

You're playing semantics. She did the same thing he did--the concept is one and the same. :whatever: Mark my words, the similarities will be drawn by the media in the days to come.


A sentence vs. an entire speech are two completely different things. There's no story in how she modified a sentence from her husband's campaign sixteen years ago. There is a story, however, in how Barack Obama stole a speech word for word from a well-known, contemporary politician. Also, Clinton isn't known for her ability to use rhetoric to her advantage, whereas Barack's empty rhetoric has been the trademark of his campaign.

No media outlet will paint her a hypocrite over one sentence.

[The Senator]

I'm sorry, but I have never been able to understand or ascertain why people and these network pundits, place blame on an essentially, a "campaign advisor". It appears never the candidate. She makes the final decision how she will conduct her campaign. She's running for office, this is her election. They advise, make suggestion, prepare situations that are more conducive to their candidate; but at the end of the day, it is her responsibility to present herself in the fashion she want to be percieve as by the American people.

Look, God forbid, she became Prez and something happen on "Day 1" and she seek input & advice from her advisors; those action she take fail horribly, are we as the American People going to say, that damn such & such f*** that situation up? Mark Penn is not the problem; he may be one of many; but he is not "THE" problem. The candidate ultimately is the reason why a campaign succeed; it's the reason why a campaign fails. She is the problem her campaign has failed.

Her campaign hasn't failed yet. If she manages to lose the delegate count, lose the popular vote, and win at the convention... she may have run the most successful campaign of any Democratic politician in the past fifty years.

[The Senator]

Well, he is the Obama campaign's national co-chairman and that didn't stop the attacks on Barack.

Obama also stole his speech from sixteen months ago and used it word to word, versus Hillary's retooling of a sentence from Bill's campaign sixteen years ago.

[BlackLantern]

Hilary could also replace John Kerry as the biggest loser the Democratic party ever had....

[The Senator]

Hilary could also replace John Kerry as the biggest loser the Democratic party ever had....

That's not John Kerry, that's Walter Mondale, and no one will ever top the awful campaign that Mondale ran.

[BlackLantern]

In most peoples' eyes, her campaign will only be considered successful if she wins....You don't get points for a good try

[The Senator]

In most peoples' eyes, her campaign will only be considered successful if she wins....You don't get points for a good try

True, but it still won't be remembered as the worst campaign in Presidential history.

[jaguarr]

Not to sound xenophobic but who gives a **** what some Brit newspaper has to say about OUR election??

Read the article. It documents tactics that Billary's people are using that shows they are grasping at straws and have no idea what they are doing, scrambling to find a way to keep the ship from capsizing. The fact that it's a British source is irrelevant.

jag

[BlackLantern]

I did read it...I just get defensive sometime.

[redfirebird2008]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/us/politics/22clinton.html?_r=1&hp

Her campaign is definitely one of the worst. Probably not THE single worst one, but definitely worse than Kerry, who didn't choke the nomination away. He only embarrassed himself in the general election campaign. Hillary's spending is out of control, and I've read some pretty raucous things about how disorganized her ground operation is.

[jaguarr]

I did read it...I just get defensive sometime.

One thing I've learned is that some of the best insight about what's going on in our own country comes from the foreign press where there isn't as much spin being put on everything. Many of them tend to stick to just reporting the news as opposed to adding in political or social agendas and spin (some don't, but a lot do) which is a big problem with our own media here in the States.

jag

[redfirebird2008]

Obama also stole his speech from sixteen months ago and used it word to word, versus Hillary's retooling of a sentence from Bill's campaign sixteen years ago.

And Hillary stole comments from Edwards that were made in the last month, all the while using Bill's 16-year old comments in the same segment. You and others accuse Obama of emotional fraud. Hillary's closing comments are the same exact thing. However, I feel that both of them meant what they said, even if they did use ideas and from other people. I do believe that Hillary meant what she said when she said she was honored to be there with him and I do believe she meant what she said about being "fine no matter what happens." And I do believe that Barack feels words and speeches are not to be completely ignored given their historical significance.

[The Senator]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/us/politics/22clinton.html?_r=1&hp

Her campaign is definitely one of the worst. Probably not THE single worst one, but definitely worse than Kerry, who didn't choke the nomination away. He only embarrassed himself in the general election campaign. Hillary's spending is out of control, and I've read some pretty raucous things about how disorganized her ground operation is.

She spent more than she has. That's typical for many campaigns. The article also doesn't mention that she has a ridiculous amount of money left for the general election, which can't be used to fund her primary race. Also, she had the organization a little under a month ago; the Obama winning streak has called for some desperate organizational measures, whether its shuffling senior staff members around or hiring consultants to fix her campaign. But her campaign isn't doomed. She still has the funds to move forward, and it's typical for a campaign to switch staffs two or three times throughout the course of the campaign-- so everything we're seeing is typical behavior, though it's being heavily scrutinized because she was once the frontrunner and may very well lose to Obama.

But mark my words: If she manages to win the Democratic nomination, her campaign strategy will be marketed as one of the more brilliant strategies in recent political history.

[Mr Sparkle]

I did read it...I just get defensive sometime.

but even if you get defensive, your country has called itself the " leader of the free world" on many occasions.
it stands to reason the leader should listen more to others in order to effectively lead.
any business course teaches that basic skill.

[redfirebird2008]

She spent more than she has. That's typical for many campaigns. The article also doesn't mention that she has a ridiculous amount of money left for the general election, which can't be used to fund her primary race. Also, she had the organization a little under a month ago; the Obama winning streak has called for some desperate organizational measures, whether its shuffling senior staff members around or hiring consultants to fix her campaign. But her campaign isn't doomed. She still has the funds to move forward, and it's typical for a campaign to switch staffs two or three times throughout the course of the campaign-- so everything we're seeing is typical behavior, though it's being heavily scrutinized because she was once the frontrunner and may very well lose to Obama.

But mark my words: If she manages to win the Democratic nomination, her campaign strategy will be marketed as one of the more brilliant strategies in recent political history.

Her campaign partly blamed funds on the reason for losing in Wisconsin. They said that Obama had 4 to 5 times as much advertising. If my town here in Texas is any indication, Barack is doing something similar again, though I have seen Hillary's ads a few times. Barack's seem to be popping up more often. She started advertising here earlier than he did, so it'll be interesting to see if that has an impact. He also ran a new ad during the first commercial of the debate last night. I think the ad was only in Texas but it might have been in Ohio as well. It was at least a minute long and a very good ad. Very positive, nothing negative about her or anything. One of her 30 second ads played later in the debate, but it was the same one I have been seeing the last week or two. I have yet to see a negative ad here in Texas from either candidate, which is a very good thing in my opinion. They are both better off when they talk about how each of them can deal with America's problems.

[kal-el2006]

pretty much sums up obama..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/to-vilify-obama-for-his-a_b_87366.html

[The Senator]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/opinion/22krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

This article doesn't mention Obama directly, but as I've said before, this election's comparisons to the 1976 election and Presidency of Jimmy Carter are uncanny.

[BlackLantern]

Jimmy Carter managed to fall up stairs....UP STAIRS.....

[redfirebird2008]

pretty much sums up obama..

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-creamer/to-vilify-obama-for-his-a_b_87366.html

It's pretty obvious that it's all about jealousy.

[Excel]

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/22/114759/473/0/460695

clinton looks to be in a hella load trouble down in the land of the texan...

[The Senator]

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/22/114759/473/0/460695

clinton looks to be in a hella load trouble down in the land of the texan...

That article shows the true, ultra-left bias of Daily Kos.

All those numbers, frequencies and crosstabs show that Hillary has an advantage, albeit a narrow one, and the author concludes that Obama will win based on a wild guess. Wow.

[Excel]

There are more delegates in the populated cities where obamas done well all the hispanic areas have small amounts of delegates

[redfirebird2008]

There are more delegates in the populated cities where obamas done well all the hispanic areas have small amounts of delegates

Because the Hispanics didn't come out to vote last time around and the blacks did. Oops. And of course part of the voting is a caucus, which favors Obama because of "activists."

[The Senator]

Um, most cities in Texas are less than 10% African-American, whereas some of them are over 20% Hispanic. If Hispanics come out in such large numbers, they may very well benefit Hillary all the way.

[Venom'sDad]

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/2/22/114759/473/0/460695

clinton looks to be in a hella load trouble down in the land of the texan...

Great Post :up: What that link illustrates, that it over for billary. She has to win by a minimal of 8 points... that's a 54-46 split. Nice find Excel. ;)

[Malice]

Um, most cities in Texas are less than 10% African-American, whereas some of them are over 20% Hispanic. If Hispanics come out in such large numbers, they may very well benefit Hillary all the way.

Houston is now I think over 50% hispanic
I am actually a minority here now

[Kelly]

*raises hand*

Me too, especially in my classroom......I'm the oldest andt he whitest.....*grins*

[sinewave]

I am sure I will make the same mistake - so no worried :up:

With a debate as entertaining as this, I certainly am not going to resort to complain about any really trivial matters.



I certainly understand WHERE you are coming from. I just hope that you aren't right. I hope the Iraqi Government can take the iniative to stablize itself. There does HAVE to be a cut off eventually though, you are right. It can't be open-ended.



Yes, more Bush than America I think though.



Conservatives prefered Romney to McCain. That is not arguable. I simply don't think there are THAT many Conservatives that will allow Obama or Hillary come to office instead of supporting McCain.

i'd say the far-right goes much further with their extremism. they're more vocal and, frankly, better at promoting their agenda than the far-left. nobody on the left even compares to the size and level of persuasion that the far-right christian conservatives hold within their party. does moveone.org have weekly calls with democratic leaders like far-right groups like "focus on the family" have with bush? you'll never convince me that they're both equal.

The far-left, to a certain extent control the media given them great persuasion with America. Again - I think this is a reason why the progress made in Iraq is not well known.

I disagree that the far right is more vocal. For ever Coulter and Limbaugh you have Michael Moore, Keith Olberman and various other far left media figures.

I would agree that the far right christian conservative base has more influence than I would like - but this election showed they didn't control the GOP. Huckabee was always the third place candidate.



I am moving closer and closer to that center :up:



Canadians come to America for healthcare because they can't receive immediate care in their own country with Universal Health Care.

I have no problem with a Government sponsored affordable Health Care plan - but to make it required for all is not proper, IMO. It should not be "one size fits all". I think it is better for us to have competition. That drive to make a profit from companies does serve to help American's. It forces them to keep their standards high.

I do think there should be a plan to deal with those that can't even afford the government health care - but to group ALL of the country into a Universal Health Care plan is not what I want.



I was trying to make it clear that while I criticize that section of the left wing - I do recognize it does not reflect a large number in the party. I hope that came across.


Last Tuesday I think with the Primary ;)

I understand the he is not the "spokesman" for the DNC - but he is a figure and a representative of the Party as a whole. It comes with the position.



You do make a good case, I can't argue that.



To be fair, the political situation has never allowed us to see the damage (or benefits) of a very left wing agenda passing through Washington.

I am also not aware of vote tampering and I do know that several of the Republican efforts to interfere with American personal lives are supported by the majority of the country (assuming you are talking about gay marriage and the like).

I do, however, share your same complaints of that same governemnt intervention and I greatly dislike the continued withering away of rights in America.



There are some services that would be impratical to privatize. I don't think Health Care (or Education) is one of them. I don't want a government controlled health care system.



Sadly my initial response to you was about twice as long and probably far better written. I am writing this with great frustration because I lost that entire effort. I do hope you will continue though (even if I have to wait) because I quite enjoy this. :up:

thanks for the kind words. at this point i'm going to bow out of all political discussions. i've got too much stress in my job and personal life and this is only exacerbating things. i've caught myself getting too worked up and emotionally invested in this topic and i'm not proud of some of the crap i've posted. i apologize to anyone i've offended.

[jaguarr]

thanks for the kind words. at this point i'm going to bow out of all political discussions. i've got too much stress in my job and personal life and this is only exacerbating things. i've caught myself getting too worked up and emotionally invested in this topic and i'm not proud of some of the crap i've posted. i apologize to anyone i've offended.

Quitter! :o

(Seriously, I can relate. I quit getting into in depth debates awhile ago as well for similar reasons.)

jag

[Malice]

Quitter! :o

(Seriously, I can relate. I quit getting into in depth debates awhile ago as well for similar reasons.)

jag

I understand...just make sure to walk away..
not worth it.

[bell110]

Watching the debate last night, and looking at Hillary made me think of one thing:


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2115/2283882663_ea7fc4951c_o.jpg

[X-Rated]

I thought that was BettleJuice. :woot:

[redfirebird2008]

Watching the debate last night, and looking at Hillary made me think of one thing:


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2115/2283882663_ea7fc4951c_o.jpg

BWHAHAHAHAHA! :woot:

[terry78]

It's like her cheeks have their own separate cheeks

[sinewave]

Quitter! :o

(Seriously, I can relate. I quit getting into in depth debates awhile ago as well for similar reasons.)

jag

I understand...just make sure to walk away..
not worth it.

yep, that's crap just eats away at you after a while.

[Lightning Strykez!]

Watching the debate last night, and looking at Hillary made me think of one thing:


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2115/2283882663_ea7fc4951c_o.jpg


Heh! :D

[The Senator]

Houston is now I think over 50% hispanic
I am actually a minority here now

I read somewhere that 77% of those in El Paso consider themselves Hispanic.

[StorminNorman]

thanks for the kind words. at this point i'm going to bow out of all political discussions. i've got too much stress in my job and personal life and this is only exacerbating things. i've caught myself getting too worked up and emotionally invested in this topic and i'm not proud of some of the crap i've posted. i apologize to anyone i've offended.

I certainly understand, though I will miss the intellectual workout.

And you have certainly never offended me :up:

[Varient]

thanks for the kind words. at this point i'm going to bow out of all political discussions. i've got too much stress in my job and personal life and this is only exacerbating things. i've caught myself getting too worked up and emotionally invested in this topic and i'm not proud of some of the crap i've posted. i apologize to anyone i've offended.

Quitter! :o

(Seriously, I can relate. I quit getting into in depth debates awhile ago as well for similar reasons.)

jag

I certainly understand, though I will miss the intellectual workout.

And you have certainly never offended me :up:


Meh.
I was enjoying someone else picking up a banner rolling up their sleeves and showing some teeth on a topic they give a crap about,................

I'm offended that you guys are stopping.


I think I'll report you two to the mods for coitus conversatius interruptus.


V.

[jaguarr]

I think I'll report you two to the mods for coitus conversatius interruptus.


V.


Whatever. Enjoy your colloquial blue balls. :hehe:

jag

[BlackLantern]

its better than staying in a debate too long and making an ass of yourself because your brain has fried and you arent making sense anymore

[sinewave]

I certainly understand, though I will miss the intellectual workout.

And you have certainly never offended me :up:

cool. back at you, man.

Meh.
I was enjoying someone else picking up a banner rolling up their sleeves and showing some teeth on a topic they give a crap about,................

I'm offended that you guys are stopping.


I think I'll report you two to the mods for coitus conversatius interruptus.


V.

don't worry, i'll be back at it eventually. hopefully with a clearer head.

[The Senator]

Obama should pick this man, retired Gen. Anthony Zinni, as his running mate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCTpNDkBqmM&feature=related

[Varient]

I really wish I could want one of these Yahoo's to run this country.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I just want to say it was nice to be on the train before he started winning :D

[comicgirl]

I just want to say it was nice to be on the train before he started winning :D
me too, daddy-o. Ever since I read his book 2 yrs ago. But, we in PA had heard positive rumbles about him as a IL Senator.

[The Senator]

But, we in PA had heard positive rumbles about him as a IL Senator.

How strange, considering he had a highly publicized speech at the 2004 Convention broadcast and replayed on almost every national news network...

[BlackLantern]

Oh Oh Oh its the Obama love fest....I'll watch where I step

[Kelly]

I'm still at the Depot on all the candidates.......

[redfirebird2008]

Proof that Hillary's people don't care about the party's success:

The Hillary Clinton campaign pushed to reporters today stories about Barack Obama and his ties to former members of a radical domestic terrorist group -- but did not note that as president, Clinton's husband pardoned more than a dozen convicted violent radicals, including a member of the same group mentioned in the Obama stories.

"Wonder what the Republicans will do with this issue," mused Clinton spokesman Phil Singer in one e-mail to the media, containing a New York Sun article reporting a $200 contribution from William Ayers, a founding member of the Weather Underground, to Obama in 2001. (Obama's ties to the radical group first surfaced last week in a Bloomberg News article.)

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4330128&page=1

Meanwhile, Obama's people responded by pointing out Bill Clinton's connections to left wing terrorist types. Clinton's campaign has been nasty during this campaign, but for one brief moment yesterday she showed some graciousness and a call for unity. But then her people turn around the next day with this kind of stuff? Good job, dividing the party and INTENTIONALLY providing free ammunition for the Republicans. They are sore losers and care more about tearing him down than the party's success.

[BlackLantern]

Me as well...none of them have made me believe they could be President

[Excel]

I just want to say it was nice to be on the train before he started winning :D

word :up:

[Venom'sDad]

Proof that Hillary's people don't care about the party's success:

The Hillary Clinton campaign pushed to reporters today stories about Barack Obama and his ties to former members of a radical domestic terrorist group -- but did not note that as president, Clinton's husband pardoned more than a dozen convicted violent radicals, including a member of the same group mentioned in the Obama stories.

"Wonder what the Republicans will do with this issue," mused Clinton spokesman Phil Singer in one e-mail to the media, containing a New York Sun article reporting a $200 contribution from William Ayers, a founding member of the Weather Underground, to Obama in 2001. (Obama's ties to the radical group first surfaced last week in a Bloomberg News article.)

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4330128&page=1

Meanwhile, Obama's people responded by pointing out Bill Clinton's connections to left wing terrorist types. Clinton's campaign has been nasty during this campaign, but for one brief moment yesterday she showed some graciousness and a call for unity. But then her people turn around the next day with this kind of stuff? Good job, dividing the party and INTENTIONALLY providing free ammunition for the Republicans. They are sore losers and care more about tearing him down than the party's success.

Great Post :up: :up: :up:

I said this in another thread.

Billary is very much aware she has to run the tables in a huge way , in order for her to come close to catching Barack Obama. By continuing all the way to the Convention Floor, hammering inexperience, being ready on day 1, Obama facing the Republican “Attack Machine” that she believe she is more equip to handle, Obama‘s plan not true Universal Health-Care, security issues, her belief he’s a great speaker but hollow on substance, and what ever “October Surprise” she pull out by March, etc…. by continuing she assist and help fuel McCain’s case against Obama. I suspect we will see signs of this in the next two debates… I implore many of you to watch it.

A McCain victory in the General would catapult Clinton once again as the front-runner in 2012. Keep in mind, not only will Obama not run again 2012 against McCain; but, billary would be able to claim, “I told you so, should have nominated me”. Not only that, billary will be 61years old by the General election. If Obama win the General, billary would have to wait until 2016, where she would be 69 years of age. She can not wait that long to be come old and insignificant, with the other up and coming young guns in the mist of the Democrat Party. So, her efforts is to try to railroad Obama’s General Election Campaign against McCain, while lobbying “Pledged & Super” delegates away on the convention Floor.

The Clintons will split and destroy the Democrat Party, in order to seize, attain, and grasp their ambitions. Look at their history, check their record & relation with Powerful People.


http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=14109769&postcount=473

[Sebastos]

Obama is who i'm rooting for. Nothing against Hilary, but Obama really is someone that I think can turn this world around.

[Memphis Slim]

Obama is who i'm rooting for. Nothing against Hilary, but Obama really is someone that I think can turn this world around.


And what is his plan to do that?

Where else on a national level has he shown that he can accomplish that?

[Darkly Dexter]

Obama is who i'm rooting for. Nothing against Hilary, but Obama really is someone that I think can turn this world around.

yes, he is the best candidate I see for the U.S. presidency in a long time.

[StorminNorman]

yes, he is the best candidate I see for the U.S. presidency in a long time.

His experience and qualifications are amazing.

:lmao:

:lmao:

:lmao:

[CorpusBlack]

His experience and qualifications are amazing.

:lmao:

:lmao:

:lmao:

:hehe:

[Kelly]

Obama is who i'm rooting for. Nothing against Hilary, but Obama really is someone that I think can turn this world around.


I don't want him to worry about turning the world around......I want our president to worry about building this country back up.....

I want a president who will tell the UN to stick it, until they get their **** together, because THEY are the ones that are supposed to be worrying about the world, and they need to spend our 52% of their budget that WE PAY FOR, BETTER........:o

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Experience argument again? Everyone left in the running is a senator. Unless you want to count Huckabee :rolleyes:

Hillary was senator for 7 years. Obama served eight years in the Illinois state Senate and is halfway through his first term in the U.S. Senate. Clinton is about to begin her eighth year in the U.S. Senate. Going by years spent as an elective official, Obama's 11 years exceeds Clinton's seven.

[Mr Sparkle]

His experience and qualifications are amazing.

:lmao:

:lmao:

:lmao:

Like G w's?:o

[Mr Sparkle]

they need to spend our 52% of their budget that WE PAY FOR, BETTER........:o

yet, no one ever thinks that the UN is the US's puppet, ever, thye think the UN is some defiant useless organization financed and housed BY the US.
yet somehow not beholden to it.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

I think it's quite funny that there are any people left buying into Clinton's "experience" argument given that she has 7 years and anything previous was not as an elective official.

[Kelly]

yet, no one ever thinks that the UN is the US's puppet, ever, thye think the UN is some defiant useless organization financed and housed BY the US.
yet somehow not beholden to it.

Well, lol.........I've read one side of that issue....."The UN Uncovered"......I'm looking for a book looking at the opposite side......but I'm so pissed about the one book, I don't know if I can handle reading anymore....:cwink:


Honestly, whoever the UN is beholding to, is a big question, YES......but whatever the case................there HAS GOT TO BE some FIXIN' goin on in those hallowed halls......hopefully Kerim and Ban Ki-moon can get something done.....

[The Senator]

Experience argument again? Everyone left in the running is a senator. Unless you want to count Huckabee :rolleyes:

Hillary was senator for 7 years. Obama served eight years in the Illinois state Senate and is halfway through his first term in the U.S. Senate. Clinton is about to begin her eighth year in the U.S. Senate. Going by years spent as an elective official, Obama's 11 years exceeds Clinton's seven.

State and local governments function differently and deal with different issues than the federal government. That's like saying Spiro Agnew, who was a county executive for four years and governor of Maryland for two, was experienced enough to be President in 1968 (he was actually Nixon's running mate). Obama may have voted to replace Chicago's sewer system or repair a few stations on the L, but I really don't see how that makes him qualified to meet with international leaders, end the war in Iraq, or reform health care in America.

[Darkly Dexter]

His experience and qualifications are amazing.

:lmao:

:lmao:

:lmao:


yes, of course. If you have a long experience, you will make the right decision every time (just like Bush) lol I can give you a large list to show you how wrong you are. Don't be so naive...

but seriously, I see as a good thing the fact that he is quite young.

[Chris B]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/opinion/22krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

This article doesn't mention Obama directly, but as I've said before, this election's comparisons to the 1976 election and Presidency of Jimmy Carter are uncanny.

Interesting article that reenforces my belief that regardless of who the next President is, he or she will be destined to only serve one term.

[StorminNorman]

Like G w's?:o

:whatever:

George Bush had an incredibly successful career as a Texas Governor.

1. Governor's experience prepares one for a President far more than a Senator because they are both executives.

2. Obama has 4 years of experience in the Senate - half of which was spent with him running for President. Obama has one of the worst attendance records of any Senator as is.

So no, NOT like Dubya's.

[StorminNorman]

yes, of course. If you have a long experience, you will make the right decision every time (just like Bush) lol I can give you a large list to show you how wrong you are. Don't be so naive...

but seriously, I see as a good thing the fact that he is quite young.

So you think the fact he has no experience to help him respond to the various demands of public office to be...a GOOD thing?

Also I am not criticizing his YOUTH. I am criticizing the fact he lacks the credentials to be President.

Teddy Roosevelt was 4 years younger, but was also a Governor, Asst. Secretary of the Navy, Combat Experience and was Vice President when he became President.

Thats a resume Obama lacks.

[The Senator]

yes, of course. If you have a long experience, you will make the right decision every time (just like Bush) lol I can give you a large list to show you how wrong you are. Don't be so naive...

but seriously, I see as a good thing the fact that he is quite young.

Actually Bush only had one term under his belt as Governor of Texas before he ran for President, so he wasn't necessarily ripe with experience when he took office in 2001.

[Mr Sparkle]

:whatever:

George Bush had an incredibly successful career as a Texas Governor.

1. Governor's experience prepares one for a President far more than a Senator because they are both executives.

2. Obama has 4 years of experience in the Senate - half of which was spent with him running for President. Obama has one of the worst attendance records of any Senator as is.

So no, NOT like Dubya's.

what's the rolleyes for? disagree?
ha!
W was governor? wow, then I guess he was in rather clear disadvantage against a vice president right? one that had been a vice president for 8 years and had been in politics since the 70's?

so actually, yes, exactly like w.

[Mr Sparkle]

Thats a resume Obama lacks.

yeah, without at least 4 years as governor he's bound to launch nukes into Canada.
it's funny how people simply repeat the talking points they are given instead of thinking for themselves.
not ha-ha funny but funny nonetheless.

[Varient]

scary.
First it was: Obama smokes. (Like that has something to do with running the country)

Then: Obama has no experience in international affairs/situations. (Then it was discovered that he had the most experience in that area of all the canidates running.)

Then : Obama was never a govenor, so he doesn't have the experience to be president,..... (Gee,.. was Abraham Lincoln ever a Govenor? I seem to recall he was a postmaster general of a territory,.. then was in the senate? Yet that didn't hamper his presidency.)

I''ll keep saying that I'm currently not for Obama,.. and my reasons were never any of the above - but if this is the "best arguements" people can come up with,... those folk need to just be quiet.

[hippie_hunter]

Obama is who i'm rooting for. Nothing against Hilary, but Obama really is someone that I think can turn this world around.

Please enlighten me. How is he going to do this?

[The Senator]

It looks like Obama's playing dirty now (well, actually, he's playing dirty again, considering he was the first person to throw mud at the beginning of this campaign):

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/23/clinton.mailings/index.html

[redfirebird2008]

It looks like Obama's playing dirty now (well, actually, he's playing dirty again, considering he was the first person to throw mud at the beginning of this campaign):

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/23/clinton.mailings/index.html

Her campaign is in no position to complain about playing dirty.

[Kelly]

No campaign can complain about playing dirty......they've ALL done it.

[hippie_hunter]

Her campaign is in no position to complain about playing dirty.

True, but his campaign is in no position to act like they're above such things when they do it themselves.

Obama being a Washington "outsider" my pale white ass :o

[The Senator]

Her campaign is in no position to complain about playing dirty.

And Obama's campaign is in a position to complain about playing dirty? Obama's the one who decided Clinton was a racist when she said it took a President to get civil rights legislation passed; Obama was the one who went on a holier-than-thou attack against Clinton for accepting money from lobbyists (even though his campaign is chaired by lobbyists across the board); Obama was the one who attacked Clinton's inability to come up with a stance over driver's licenses for illegals, even though he couldn't come up with a position himself; Obama is the one who constantly criticized Clinton's vote for the war in Iraq, despite that fact that he not only wasn't in a position to have voted for the war anyway, but he consistently voted to keep the war going during his career in the Senate...

When Clinton raises claims about him being inexperienced, everyone jumps up and down and starts pissing and moaning how she's being wicked and coldhearted. Obama sends fliers around incorrectly describing her record and plans for future accomplishments, and automatically she deserves it.

Obama has constantly spoke out against this sort of behavior. But I guess because he did it and Clinton didn't, it's perfectly acceptable. Hell, it's probably noble.

Quite the double-standard-express we're riding these days.

[redfirebird2008]

And Obama's campaign is in a position to complain about playing dirty? Obama's the one who decided Clinton was a racist when she said it took a President to get civil rights legislation passed; Obama was the one who went on a holier-than-thou attack against Clinton for accepting money from lobbyists (even though his campaign is chaired by lobbyists across the board); Obama was the one who attacked Clinton's inability to come up with a stance over driver's licenses for illegals, even though he couldn't come up with a position himself; Obama is the one who constantly criticized Clinton's vote for the war in Iraq, despite that fact that he not only wasn't in a position to have voted for the war anyway, but he consistently voted to keep the war going during his career in the Senate...

When Clinton raises claims about him being inexperienced, everyone jumps up and down and starts pissing and moaning how she's being wicked and coldhearted. Obama sends fliers around incorrectly describing her record and plans for future accomplishments, and automatically she deserves it.

Obama has constantly spoke out against this sort of behavior. But I guess because he did it and Clinton didn't, it's perfectly acceptable. Hell, it's probably noble.

Quite the double-standard-express we're riding these days.

That's exactly the problem though. She is a flat-out liar to claim she has 35 years of EFFECTIVE experience. She graduated law school at age 25 (35 years ago) and worked with corporations as a lawyer for a long time after that. That does not qualify her to lead the people but she's never been called out on her claims except for some obscure articles.

http://www.slate.com/id/2182073/

Her speech that you linked to never mentions the negative attacks she has hurled at him, many of which were Rovian including her attacks on his health care plan. It's all dirty stuff no doubt and I wish Obama would not have sent out those mailers or made some of the negative attacks he has on her. I also wish she wouldn't have sent out negative mailers or accused him of plagiarism.

[The Senator]

Her speech that you linked to never mentions the negative attacks she has hurled at him, many of which were Rovian including her attacks on his health care plan. It's all dirty stuff no doubt and I wish Obama would not have sent out those mailers or made some of the negative attacks he has on her. I also wish she wouldn't have sent out negative mailers or accused him of plagiarism.

She never sent any mailers from her campaign, though. A union which endorsed her did. These fliers come directly from the Obama campaign.

As for the issue on experience... I don't stand by the whole 35 years of experience thing she throws out there. However, I do stand by her seven years in the Senate, in addition to her time spent as First Lady. Yeah, she didn't have any legislative role as First Lady, but she played a significant role none the less. Obama has pushed bill after bill after bill which either has no substance or is completely non-binding, or has loophole after loophole which makes the bill irrelevant as it is. He has the worst attendance of any U.S. Senator, and he's spent almost half his time there running for President than he has been focused on his job as Senator. And I'm not talking about positioning himself for a run, either-- I'm talking about actually running.

So, simply put: He doesn't have the experience I want in a President, and the "experience" he has racked up over the years is no indication of what kind of a President he may actually be.

[BlackLantern]

So, simply put: He doesn't have the experience I want in a President, and the "experience" he has racked up over the years is no indication of what kind of a President he may actually be.

My feelings exactly....I don't think he has the cojones for the job

[redfirebird2008]

Her experience as First Lady has been debunked by the New York Times, a paper that endorsed her.

http://www.slate.com/id/2182073/

But a Dec. 26 New York Times story revealed that during her husband's two terms in office, Hillary Clinton did not hold a security clearance, did not attend meetings of the National Security Council, and was not given a copy of the president's daily intelligence briefing. During trips to Bosnia and Kosovo, she "acted as a spokeswoman for American interests rather than as a negotiator." On military affairs, most of her experience derives not from her White House years but from serving on the Senate armed services committee. In this capacity, William Kristol notes gleefully in the Jan. 14 New York Times, Clinton told Gen. David Petraeus this past September that his reports of military progress in Iraq—since shown to be undeniable—required "the willing suspension of disbelief." (What Kristol and Clinton both fail to say is that the surge's laudable military success has created a short-term opportunity that the Iraqi government and Bush himself are doing tragically little to seize. For example, a much-touted move by the Iraqi parliament to open government jobs to former members of the Baath party is, according to a Jan. 14 New York Times story, "riddled with loopholes and caveats to the point that some Sunni and *****e officials say it could actually exclude more former Baathists than it lets back in.")

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/26/us/politics/26clinton.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

And the mailer she sent out asking "Will you be one of them?" says "Paid for by Hillary for President." Sounds pretty damn official to me, so stop trying to smear Obama as the only one doing it "officially." Your girl is just as guilty and you seem to be in denial about it.

Read it and download the PDF: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/02/17/kennedy-calls-clinton-attacks-fearmongering/

Meanwhile, she ran constant negative ads on TV against his health care that were paid for by her campaign. She's just as guilty of criticizing another Democrat on health care.

[hippie_hunter]

This arguement just proves that both of them suck :p

[redfirebird2008]

This arguement just proves that both of them suck :p

I agree.

Yet another negative mailer from Clinton's campaign:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/youve_got_mailers.html

[redfirebird2008]

Here's the facts on the negative health care mailer from Obama:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/harry_louise_again.html

Notice the date? Her campaign has already complained about it for a while now, but she's pretending that today was the first time she'd heard of it. Riiiiiight.

By the way, if you look up in the left hand corner you can download the PDF of the mailer. I do not agree with negative mailers and I wish that both candidates would stop it.

[Superman4ever]

It looks like Obama's playing dirty now (well, actually, he's playing dirty again, considering he was the first person to throw mud at the beginning of this campaign):

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/23/clinton.mailings/index.html

This just shows how manipulative and evil she is, nothing more. She's been running a smear campaign against Obama from the very beginning. Her campaign was the first one to smear him as a "Muslim".

Either way this really doesn't help the situation. Stop the dirty bickering and get to the damn issues already!

[souvlaki]

So what is this all about?

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=734

From what I'm understanding, delegates voting for Edwards, and Kucinich in Nevada county conventions now have the option at the to vote for Obama, which may change the outcome of Nevada's caucus results. There are also problems with 8000 people showing up to a convention that can only hold 5000 people. Can someone a little more familiar with the way the caucuses and county conventions work give me an idea of what is going on?

[The Senator]

This just shows how manipulative and evil she is, nothing more. She's been running a smear campaign against Obama from the very beginning. Her campaign was the first one to smear him as a "Muslim".

Either way this really doesn't help the situation. Stop the dirty bickering and get to the damn issues already!

That wasn't her campaign. That was an independent organization which submitted a false story to Fox News, which ran with the story. The person who submitted the story was a Clinton donor. Hillary Clinton had nothing to do with it, and Obama even said that he believed Clinton was not responsible for the attacks.

However, Obama was the one who attacked Hillary Clinton for accepting money from lobbyists-- right before he went off and hired prominent lobbyists to co-chair his campaign-- in April 2007. Then Edwards followed suit. She never attacked Obama outright until he and Edwards tag-teamed against her at one of the debates in November. Obama just came out looking like a bigger ass anyway (Obama attacked Hillary for being unable to take a position on drivers licenses for illegals; then he couldn't come up with a position himself, and the audience laughed at him).

[redfirebird2008]

Meanwhile, Hillary misled women in New Hamsphire on the issue of abortion.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/18/trying_to_heal_a_rift_in_new_h_1.html

One of the three Clinton supporters went even further, saying in an interview Thursday that signing the letter attacking Obama was a "mistake."

Katie Wheeler, a former state senator, said the Clinton campaign had not given her background information about Obama's record on abortion rights when it asked her to sign the letter calling him weak on the issue, and said that, as a result, she did not understand the context of the votes that the letter was attacking him over.

"It should never have gotten to the point where anyone thought Obama was not pro-choice," said Wheeler, a founder of the New Hampshire chapter of NARAL Pro-Choice America. "I don't think the Clinton campaign should have done that. It was divisive and unnecessary...I think it was a mistake and I've spoken to the national [Clinton campaign] and told them it caused problems in New Hampshire, and am hoping they won't do it again."

[redfirebird2008]

http://www.whitehouse.com/

3 outcomes to this.

1. He is telling the truth. This would only be confirmed if Sinclair passes the polygraph and Obama fails a polygraph. And if both pass a polygraph, the only way to know is physical evidence. If there is none, then it's a joke of an allegation.

2. He's lying. Sinclair fails the polygraph.

3. He's crazy. A reporter in Chicago investigated Sinclair and found out that he was supposedly in an institution at the time this alleged incident occurred. This would be confirmed by Sinclair and Obama both passing a polygraph test and no other evidence being presented.

[Memphis Slim]

This is bull****. What's next, people claiming Ron Paul is a racist? :ninja:
HE'S NOT??????? :eek:




















:hehe:

[Memphis Slim]

WASHINGTON - Sen. Barack Obama's refusal to wear an American flag lapel pin along with a photo of him not putting his hand over his heart during the National Anthem led conservatives on Internet and in the media to question his patriotism.

Now Obama's wife, Michelle, has drawn their ire, too, for saying recently that she's really proud of her country for the first time in her adult life.
Conservative consultants say that combined, the cases could be an issue for Obama in the general election if he wins the nomination, especially as he runs against Vietnam war hero Sen. John McCain.
"The reason it hasn't been an issue so far is that we're still in the microcosm of the Democratic primary," said Republican consultant Roger Stone. "Many Americans will find the three things offensive. Barack Obama is out of the McGovern wing of the party, and he is part of the blame America first crowd."
Opponents of Sen. John Kerry proved in the 2004 election that voters are sensitive to suggestions that a candidate is not sufficiently patriotic. The Democratic presidential nominee's campaign was torpedoed by critics of his Vietnam War record called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, even though he won multiple military honors and was lauded by his superiors.
The Swift Boat campaign started as a relatively small television ad buy that exploded into an issue that dogged Kerry for months. The Massachusetts senator has conceded since losing to President Bush that the campaign and his lackluster response to unsubstantiated allegations he considered unworthy of a reaction likely cost him the election. And the term even became part of the campaign lexicon — swift boating.
Obama already is the subject of a shadowy smear campaign based on the Internet that falsely suggests he's a Muslim intent on destroying the United States. Obama is a Christian and has been fighting the e-mail hoax, which also claims he doesn't put his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance, and he's been trying to correct the misinformation.
"Whenever I'm in the United States Senate, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America," Obama frequently tells voters.
"I've been going to the same church for 20 years, praising Jesus," he adds.
Retired Major General Scott Gration, an Obama military adviser, said he expects the attacks will only increase if Obama wins the Democratic nomination.
"People are projecting things and taking things out of context," Gration said. "There's absolutely no question in my mind that Michelle and Barack are extremely patriotic, appreciate our freedoms and our values and everything else that the flag represents."
Officials with the McCain campaign and the Republican Party say they won't be suggesting Obama is less than patriotic, and instead plan to focus their criticisms on his record and inexperience if he wins the nomination. Well-funded outside groups, however, consider anything fair game.
Conservative Republican consultant Keith Appell, who worked with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, said Obama's opposition to the war will create a "striking contrast between McCain the war hero and Obama the poster child for the anti-war movement."
"If you are McCain, you want to play up the decorated war hero, loves his country, served his country," Appell said. "You want to play those themes up as much as possible, especially in comparison to Obama and his role in the anti-war movement."
On Monday, Michelle Obama told an audience in Milwaukee, "For time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country. Not just because Barack is doing well, but I think people are hungry for change." :huh:

Cindy McCain, McCain's wife, days later responded by saying, "I have, and always will be, proud of my country." Barack Obama has expressed frustration that his wife's remarks had been taken out of context and turned into political fodder — both the Obamas say she was talking about politics in the United States, not the country itself.
Last summer, Obama was photographed by Time magazine at an event in Iowa standing with his hands folded during the national anthem. His primary rivals Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson appear beside him, with their hands on their hearts.

It has been repeatedly reported that the moment came during the Pledge of Allegiance, but that's not the case.

In October, Obama told Iowa television station KCRG that he decided to stop wearing a U.S. flag lapel pin during the run-up to the Iraq war because it had become "a substitute for, I think, true patriotism." :huh:

"I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest. Instead, I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great and, hopefully, that will be a testimony to my patriotism," Obama said.
Obama's comments led conservatives and media commentators to question his patriotism.

"First he kicked his American flag pin to the curb. Now Barack Obama has a new round of patriotism problems. Wait until you hear what the White House hopeful didn't do during the singing of the national anthem," said Steve Doocy, co-host of "Fox and Friends" on the Fox News Channel.
"He felt it OK to come out of the closet as the domestic insurgent he is," former radio host Mark Williams said on Fox.

Gration said he had a copy of the national anthem photo e-mailed to him by a friend who didn't know the facts and questioned how a military man could support someone who doesn't honor the Pledge of Allegiance.
"I go to baseball games and football games and there's just a minority of us who put our hands over our heart. It's not an indication of patriotism," Gration said. Gration said he personally wears a flag pin, but "if I meet someone who doesn't have a lapel pin, it doesn't mean they are more or less patriotic than I am."
And, he added, "I don't think you can find Barack again not putting his hand over his heart at the national anthem."
__________________________________________________ ___

:whatever: Well, I guess not! Especially after being called out for not doing it!
He stops wearing his flag pin because he disagrees with a U.S. policy?? What kinda crap is that? He's a representative of this nation....for better or worse!

Now he wants to be President? ___

[Darkly Dexter]

so, if you don't wear an American flag lapel pin you're not patriot? wow the conservative agenda against Obama is getting lame.

[Handsome Rob]

Well, to be honest, Sen. Obama's lack of "apparent" patriotism will be a liability to him in the election, if he ends up running against Sen. McCain. Like it or not, publicly acceptable and expected displays of patriotism DO matter when it comes to public officials, especially in an election year.

I remember an episode of "Seinfeld" where Kramer didn't want to wear a red ribbon at an AIDS walk. And, he subsequently was repeatedly harassed for it by several fellow walkers. Despite the fact that he said he was there to support AIDS awareness and was a participant in the walk, it still didn't matter to the "Ribbon Nazis." On a personal note, I refuse to wear a LiveStrong bracelet. For one, I don't wear bracelets. Also, I wouldn't want to give anyone the impression that I'm trying to be public about my charitable donations. Does that mean that I don't support cancer research/survivorship? Well, the answer to that is between me, God, and possibly the IRS.

Sen. Obama's patriotism doesn't rest on outward, public displays of conventional patriotism--no one's patriotism does. If that's the case, then I'm not patriotic. I don't say the Pledge of Allegiance in public (or in private), because it contradicts my religious beliefs. Does that mean I'm not a patriot? :huh:

[SuBe]

Well, to be honest, Sen. Obama's lack of "apparent" patriotism will be a liability to him in the election, if he ends up running against Sen. McCain. Like it or not, publicly acceptable and expected displays of patriotism DO matter when it comes to public officials, especially in an election year.

I remember an episode of "Seinfeld" where Kramer didn't want to wear a red ribbon at an AIDS walk. And, he subsequently was repeatedly harassed for it by several fellow walkers. Despite the fact that he said he was there to support AIDS awareness and was a participant in the walk, it still didn't matter to the "Ribbon Nazis." On a personal note, I refuse to wear a LiveStrong bracelet. For one, I don't wear bracelets. Also, I wouldn't want to give anyone the impression that I'm trying to be public about my charitable donations. Does that mean that I don't support cancer research/survivorship? Well, the answer to that is between me, God, and possibly the IRS.

Sen. Obama's patriotism doesn't rest on outward, public displays of conventional patriotism--no one's patriotism does. If that's the case, then I'm not patriotic. I don't say the Pledge of Allegiance in public (or in private), because it contradicts my religious beliefs. Does that mean I'm not a patriot? :huh:

***** the IRS!

Sorry, I had to get that out.

Ummm... good post. I agree, just because I don't wear a Superman Shirt Everyday, doesn't mean I'm not a Fan of Superman. :cwink:

[comicgirl]

so, if you don't wear an American flag lapel pin you're not patriot? wow the conservative agenda against Obama is getting lame.They're scratching around for anything

[Matt]

For Christ's sake, there is plenty to attack Obama on without sinking to this.

[Matt]

XLZ18U1Txnc

:lmao:

Media portrayl is so true and Armisen was dead on as Obama. SNL is actually pumping out good skits again :up:

[Darthphere]

Yeah, I'm getting tired of all this garbage in which you can't say anything bad about Obama, you can't look at Obama the wrong way, and you can't even think of him in a negative way. Then, Hilary gets the major evil ***** label. Which really speaks to some of the mindsets here, considering that I don't even think it would be a major issue if it was a man doing all the "evil *****" things Hillary does.

[Matt]

Yeah, I'm getting tired of all this garbage in which you can't say anything bad about Obama, you can't look at Obama the wrong way, and you can't even think of him in a negative way. Then, Hilary gets the major evil ***** label. Which really speaks to some of the mindsets here, considering that I don't even think it would be a major issue if it was a man doing all the "evil *****" things Hillary does.

The funny thing is, he IS doing it. Thats the funny part. He is just more articulate about the mudslinging and anytime anyone calls him on it, his supporters scream "WELL HILLARY DID IT FIRST!" Should it really matter? Hillary isn't the one labeling herself as above our entire political system.

[BlackLantern]

both Armisen and Amy Poehler are dead on

[Darthphere]

The funny thing is, he IS doing it. Thats the funny part. He is just more articulate about the mudslinging and anytime anyone calls him on it, his supporters scream "WELL HILLARY DID IT FIRST!" Should it really matter? Hillary isn't the one labeling herself as above our entire political system.

For the record, I don't like either of them, but it's just flabbergasting how much crap Obama gets away with, and how much crap Hillary gets. Is Hillary an evil *****? Probably, but she really isn't doing anything that a hundred male political figures haven't done before.

[Matt]

For the record, I don't like either of them, but it's just flabbergasting how much crap Obama gets away with, and how much crap Hillary gets. Is Hillary an evil *****? Probably, but she really isn't doing anything that a hundred male political figures haven't done before.

Nor do I, though after seeing exactly what you see, I am seriously tempted to vote Hillary in the PA primary out of spite. I won't, mind you, because she has as little business being president as Obama...but I'm tempted.

[Darthphere]

Nor do I, though after seeing exactly what you see, I am seriously tempted to vote Hillary in the PA primary out of spite. I won't, mind you, because she has as little business being president as Obama...but I'm tempted.

I really don't know what I'm going to do at this point, election day is going to be hard for me.

[BlackLantern]

same here....I might go all Brewsters' Millions and go "None of the Above"

[Darthphere]

same here....I might go all Brewsters' Millions and go "None of the Above"

Well Nader just entered the race....

[BlackLantern]

Well Nader just entered the race....

You'd think Ralph would get it by this point.....Him and Ron Paul seem to be in this constant state of denial about running for President.

[Darthphere]

You'd think Ralph would get it by this point.....Him and Ron Paul seem to be in this constant state of denial about running for President.

They should team up, they might get 7% of the vote!!!!!

[Goddessreicho]

XLZ18U1Txnc

:lmao:

Media portrayl is so true and Armisen was dead on as Obama. SNL is actually pumping out good skits again :up:

This is just in case people don't go into the thread you made.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/pd8_Fjj2uuk&rel=1&border=0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/pd8_Fjj2uuk&rel=1&border=0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent"width="425" height="355"></embed></object>:woot:

[BlackLantern]

They should team up, they might get 7% of the vote!!!!!

Heck...they could break double digits

[Darthphere]

:wow:

[Matt]

What intrigues me about Bloomberg, if he decides to run is...he is fiscally conservative so he can pick up some Perot-esque votes. Especially with McCain's lack of experience economically. Meanwhile, he is probably just as if not more socially liberal than Obama and Clinton, so he can steal some votes there. Plus he can probably appeal to moderates who feel neither side represents them. However, unlike most third party candidates. He has limitless funds and resources and is capable of running a REAL nationwide campaign. He could be a very interesting candidate. But with McCain having the nomination, I doubt he will run.

[BlackLantern]

I think Bloomberg should take a run at Governor or Senator first.....but I agree, Matt, he can garner a following if he works it right.

[The Senator]

While it may be a lame argument, conservatives will never the less attack him for it. The sad thing is, the American people are dumb enough to consider it a major issue.

[jaguarr]

Obama let his woman speak out of turn! He must be a terrorist! :cmad:

jag

[redfirebird2008]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svo9mutE6TM

[Zen]

i hate to GodWin Slims Argument... but who better to use such a strategy on,

you know who else was really patriotic for their country? Stalin... Hitler... Mussolini... among so many others who hide behind the banner of patriotism for causes which rarely ever effect good on the people.

true patriotism expects a wisdom you clearly lack. Our country was founded on skepticism and rebellion... its what keeps us clean and stable.

as to Obama's wife, she said really proud, and honestly many people are not paticularly enamored with our political process. so many people have said america is not ready, and will not vote in a black man for president... and i think those people are surprised to realize the country is much more primed for a change in the guard than they would have believed. Voter turnout will be ridiculous... there are things here to be proud of for the first time, and just as Matt says... there are FAR better things to debate over then this drivel.

Obama does recite the pledge of Allegiance. its a fact... don't faun over a picture.

the lapel pin is honestly ridiculous... everyone wears one now because they have to or else this garbage happens. its become a token act which means nothing other than to offer a hollow gesture of patriotism. i think what Obama is saying and doing is smart...

Bush wears a Lapel pin even as he sends no bid contracts out to a company who is paid bonuses to waste our money, loosing 9 billion cash on pallets.... completely unexplained... putting in place education policy that has set us back a decade and allowed the rest of the world to continue to exceed our education standards... whos security policy has seen us neglect the cradle of Al quaeda and focus on an a place that has helped the extremist muslim world hate us more, and recuit more soldiers against us...

but thats all ok, because he wears a Pin ... that means he loves this country and wouldnt do anything to harm it so he and dick cheney can make money off it... nawwwwww.... hes got a pin, hes ok.

If only we scrutinized based on real actions to draw the lines of patriotism instead of wearing a hollow symbol.

:csad:

[Kelly]

Obama let his woman speak out of turn! He must be a terrorist! :cmad:

jag

Well apparently not an Islamic Terrorist.......they don't let their women speak out of turn....:o

[Mr Sparkle]

:whatever: Well, I guess not! Especially after being called out for not doing it!
He stops wearing his flag pin because he disagrees with a U.S. policy?? What kinda crap is that? He's a representative of this nation....for better or worse!

Now he wants to be President? ___

:huh: he clearly stated that he thought of it as "substitute for true patriotism" are you really childish enough to let this be important to you?
but you are right, he is a representative of the US NOT the administration.

keep that in mind.

[jaguarr]

Well apparently not an Islamic Terrorist.......they don't let their women speak out of turn....:o

:D

jag

[BlackLantern]

Well apparently not an Islamic Terrorist.......they don't let their women speak out of turn....:o

can you declare Jihad on women who won't shut their yapper??

[comicgirl]

He's the front runner and probably the Dem. nominee for '08. Every move he makes will be spotlighted.......................


Yeah, I'm proud of the quality issues I read/hear about candidates through the media.....sleeping around, people lifting lines from speeches, what pin to wear to show "loyalty" to the State, negative sniping on par with old ladies at a beauty parlor, desparate gladhanding for $$$


Beautiful

[Kelly]

can you declare Jihad on women who won't shut their yapper??


Yes, but our PMS, trumps your Jihad......:o :oldrazz:

[jaguarr]

Yes, but our PMS, trumps your Jihad......:o :oldrazz:

This is why it's important to track a woman's menstrual cycles if you are planning a Jihad on her. If you can time it so she's just at the very tail end of one, she'll be depleted and a bit emotional which will make it easier to attack her. If you try to do so while she's at the peak of her cycle, she will destroy you with her Hulk like rage and strength. It's true. Look it up.

jag

[Kelly]

This is why it's important to track a woman's menstrual cycles if you are planning a Jihad on her. If you can time it so she's just at the very tail end of one, she'll be depleted and a bit emotional which will make it easier to attack her. If you try to do so while she's at the peak of her cycle, she will destroy you with her Hulk like rage and strength. It's true. Look it up.

jag

Women sent out to combat Jihad take THE PILL, the ultimate stealth PMS......

[jaguarr]

Women sent out to combat Jihad take THE PILL, the ultimate stealth PMS......

*updates intelligence file* :ninja:

jag

[BlackLantern]

This is why it's important to track a woman's menstrual cycles if you are planning a Jihad on her. If you can time it so she's just at the very tail end of one, she'll be depleted and a bit emotional which will make it easier to attack her. If you try to do so while she's at the peak of her cycle, she will destroy you with her Hulk like rage and strength. It's true. Look it up.

jag

Yes...as an ill timed Jihad can lead to pulverized testicles

[redfirebird2008]

Polygraph analysis from the first expert indicates deception on both questions, one being about drugs and the other about sex. They are awaiting the analysis of a second expert, which I am sure will also come back to show that this jerk was lying. They paid him $10,000 just to take the test. What a scam. So apparently anyone in America can come forth making these kind of claims and get paid a quick $10,000. Ridiculous.

http://www.whitehouse.com/NewsComments.aspx?start=&NewsID=116#comments

[comicgirl]

Notice these charges come only when Obama is a leading presidential candidate.ayup

[Varient]

I'm glad it's getting lighter in here.

People were bleating about the wrong things.

[Zen]

if anyone gives weight to lie detector tests, this guy has failed them

http://www.whitehouse.com/NewsComments.aspx?start=&NewsID=116


Dr. Ed Gelb, Former President of the American Polygraph Association was the Polygraph expert selected by Whitehouse.com. He has done over 30,000 polygraph examinations over his long career. There were two polygraph tests administered by Dr. Gelb on Friday. the first polygraph asked Mr. Sinclair on his sex claims. The second polygraph test asked Mr. Sinclair on the drug use claims. There was deception indicated in both tests.
As mentioned yesterday Mr. Sinclair did pass his drug screen so there were no drugs in his system which could have interfered with the test. We have asked Mr. Sinclair on several occasions to put us in contact with the Limousine driver that he named for other news organizations earlier and for us on Friday that was supposed to corroborate his story. As of today he has still not put us in contact with the limousine driver whom he told us he stays in constant contact with.

It was our intention to get to the truth in this serious matter rather than have these allegations that were made almost a month ago drag on to election day. Due to the seriousness of this issue we made the results public today rather than waiting until Monday when we would have received the second expert's conclusions. When we receive the second expert's conclusions we will post those results as well.

We will have all of the written results posted on the site in the next week including video taken of the Polygraph testing so there will be full disclosure and transparency on our part and eliminate any suspicion of any wrongdoing or manipulations of the testing or the results by Whitehouse.com or the polygraph experts. Later this afternoon we will post the actual report by Dr. Gelb.

[Lightning Strykez!]

Is it just me...or has this whole campaigning process becoming one of the MOST ugly in recent memory?

I mean...seriously, the drama and lame charges are bordering on sheer stupidity now.

[Zen]

Im not sure about most ugly...

but as for the level of lame and pettiness....

its not even the general election

[BlackLantern]

I say we simply lock Hilary and Obama in a room with a bowie knife

[Zen]

I say we simply lock Hilary and Obama in a room with a bowie knife

or...

some liquor and condoms

[BlackLantern]

Thank you Zen...for sending me to a horrific mental place....

[jaguarr]

LMAO! Ugly, ugly things going on in here, Zen!

jag

[Memphis Slim]

CHICAGO — In his first major public address since a cancer crisis, Nation of Islam Minister Louis Farrakhan said that presidential candidate Barack Obama is the “hope of the entire world” that the U.S. will change for the better. The 74-year-old Farrakhan, former leader of the black Muslim group, never endorsed Obama outright, but spent much of his nearly two-hour speech Sunday to an estimated crowd of 20,000 people praising the Illinois senator.

“This young man is the hope of the entire world that America will change and be made better,” he said. “This young man is capturing audiences of black and brown and red and yellow. If you look at Barack Obama’s audiences and look at the effect of his words, those people are being transformed.”

Farrakhan compared Obama to the religion’s founder, Fard Muhammad, who also had a white mother and black father.
“A black man with a white mother became a savior to us,” he told the crowd of mostly followers. “A black man with a white mother could turn out to be one who can lift America from her fall.”
Farrakhan also leveled small jabs at Hillary Rodham Clinton, Obama’s rival for the Democratic nomination, suggesting that she represents the politics of the past and has been engaging in dirty politics.
Said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton: “Sen. Obama has been clear in his objections to Minister Farrakhan’s past pronouncements and has not solicited the minister’s support.”

Farrakhan rebuilt the Nation of Islam, which promotes black empowerment and nationalism, in the late 1970s after W.D. Mohammed, the son of longtime leader Elijah Mohammed, moved his followers toward mainstream Islam.

Farrakhan has drawn attention for calling Judaism a “gutter religion” and suggesting crack cocaine might have been a CIA plot to enslave blacks.
In recent years, however, officials with the Nation of Islam have promoted unity and tolerance among religions. Farrakhan now often quotes the texts of other religions, such as the Bible, in his speeches.
Farrakhan’s keynote address at McCormick Place, the city’s convention center, wrapped up three days of events geared at unifying followers and targeting youth.

It had a different tone from a year ago, when Farrakhan made what was called his final public address at a Saviours’ Day event in Detroit. The 74-year-old was recovering from complications from prostate cancer and months earlier had temporarily passed on leadership duties of the organization’s day-to-day activities to an executive board.

[Zen]

Farakhan is still alive/relevent?

[Varient]

or...

some liquor and condoms

Thank you Zen...for sending me to a horrific mental place....

LMAO! Ugly, ugly things going on in here, Zen!

jag

I got nothing to add to that,... I can't even puketur this.

V.

[Varient]

Farakhan is still alive/relevent?

Meh.

I'll Just waste my vote and have a clear concience by voting Independent.

[kal-el2006]

Clinton Mocks Obama and her supporters..yea real presidential hilary..she's
losing it.

UBuuR62hVAs&rel=1

[souvlaki]

Clinton Mocks Obama and her supporters..yea real presidential hilary..she's
losing it.

UBuuR62hVAs&rel=1

I saw that yesterday. That was a pretty low blow, I was somewhat taken aback by it. I know there are a few Clinton supporters around these parts that think Obama has been just as dirty in this campaign, but at least to my knowledge he hasn't actually resorted to mocking her supporters. She's done it twice now in one week.

[StorminNorman]

"Dressed" Obama photo.

http://drudgereport.com/oa.jpg

Obama campaign manager David Plouffe accused the Clinton campaign Monday of "shameful offensive fear-mongering" by circulating a photo as an attempted smear.

Plouffe was reacting to a banner headline on the Drudge Report saying that aides to Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) had e-mailed a photo calling attention to the African roots of Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

"The photo, taken in 2006, shows the Democrat front-runner dressed as a Somali Elder, during his visit to Wajir, a rural area in northeastern Kenya," the Drudge Report said.

The Clinton campaign did not deny the charge, but did not comment further.

Plouffe said in a statement: “On the very day that Senator Clinton is giving a speech about restoring respect for America in the world, her campaign has engaged in the most shameful, offensive fear-mongering we’ve seen from either party in this election. This is part of a disturbing pattern that led her county chairs to resign in Iowa, her campaign chairman to resign in New Hampshire, and it’s exactly the kind of divisive politics that turns away Americans of all parties and diminishes respect for America in the world," said Plouffe.

The photo created huge buzz in political circles and immediately became known as "the 'dressed' photo," reflecting the Drudge terminology.

[kal-el2006]

lol in kenya..where HIS FATHER was born..grasping for straws...

[BlackLantern]

Hilarys' campaign just rolled a D-12 on suck with that one

[Matt]

Oh god. I've never seen a campaign get THIS desperate.

[jaguarr]

This will end up backfiring on her in a major, major way.

jag

[Matt]

Does it matter at this point? Everything she does backfires. Beggars can't be choosers, after all.

[jaguarr]

Serves her right for being a petty whore. :up:

jag

[deathfromabove]

Is it just me...or has this whole campaigning process becoming one of the MOST ugly in recent memory?

I mean...seriously, the drama and lame charges are bordering on sheer stupidity now.

i think its been pretty tame. were you watching in 2000 and 2004?:oldrazz: i think anytime dirt has been slung the public has reacted poorly so everyone is trying to play nice (relatively). the public is sick of dirty politica and baseless personal attack.

its one of the reasons hillary is going down and obama is excelling.

character

Farakhan is still alive/relevent?

alive: yes.

relevant: no.

[BlackLantern]

Serves her right for being a petty whore. :up:

jag

Whore would insinuate she has sex.....which I don't think she does....

[redfirebird2008]

Does it matter at this point? Everything she does backfires. Beggars can't be choosers, after all.

LOL, true. This one will just be another in a long list of things that have backfired on her. I'm glad Obama's people stood up against it though. Usually they just laugh at her (rightfully so) but this is truly a nasty type of Rove politics.

[jaguarr]

Whore would insinuate she has sex.....which I don't think she does....

There are many ways to sell a part of yourself, BL.

jag

[BlackLantern]

There are many ways to sell a part of yourself, BL.

jag

True, true....anyway I don't think Bill has climbed on top of her in quite some time

[jaguarr]

True, true....anyway I don't think Bill has climbed on top of her in quite some time

Can you blame the guy?

http://www.all4humor.com/images/files/Scary%20Hillary%20Clinton.jpg

jag

[BlackLantern]

^^^^You can't....at all....

[Matt]

i think its been pretty tame. were you watching in 2000 and 2004?:oldrazz: i think anytime dirt has been slung the public has reacted poorly so everyone is trying to play nice (relatively). the public is sick of dirty politica and baseless personal attack.

its one of the reasons hillary is going down and obama is excelling.

character


Its pretty dirty in terms of a primary. Granted, its not as bad as 2000 when ads were being ran to suggest that McCain's adopted child was his illigetiment bastard child, but its still pretty damn dirty and in all fairness, the Bush campaign wasn't officially linked to those.

[redfirebird2008]

Its pretty dirty in terms of a primary. Granted, its not as bad as 2000 when ads were being ran to suggest that McCain's adopted child was his illigetiment bastard child, but its still pretty damn dirty and in all fairness, the Bush campaign wasn't officially linked to those.

Right. There's been some pretty nasty emails sent around about Obama, and of course the rumor from Insight Magazine (in which they blamed the Clinton campaign). The right wing has already tried everything to tear down Obama based on his middle name, his last name, his religion, his ethnic background, you name it. Hillary's had to fire people in Iowa for writing emails that called him a Muslim, so it's certainly not just the right wing that is doing this stuff.

[Mr Sparkle]

Farakhan is still alive/relevent?

not only that.
his opinion is somehow supossed to cast a negative light on Obama.
if he said " I love blue skies" we would automatically hate blue skies wouldn't we?

it would be the logical thing to do.